RE: Bobby inaccuracy?

> Unfortunately, your decision to keep the word "logo" 
> indicates that you 
> still do not quite understand the function of the alt 
> attribute. The alt 
> attribute text is used to *replace* the image. That means 
> that it serves 
> the same function as the image. It is *not* a label for the image.


<sound class="penny_drop">
I think deep down I did actually grasp what alt text was for but I was just
being a bit dense today. 

I see now what everyone has been saying and have learned a good lesson. 

thanks Charles et al for your patience and help.

Julian


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Charles F. Munat [mailto:chas@munat.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 5:00 PM
> To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Bobby inaccuracy?
> 
> 
> 
> Scarlett Julian (ED) wrote:
> 
> > Not sure about leaving out the word logo though. To my mind 
> if the alt text
> > was just Sheffield City Council there would be no telling 
> whether it was a
> > photo of all Councillors or the Council's crest/coat of 
> arms, or a photo of
> > the town hall...you get the idea. I think the combination 
> of alt text and
> > title that you suggest solves it nicely but for 
> succinctness I think I'll
> > stick with including "logo" in the alt text.
> 
> 
> Reply:
> 
> Unfortunately, your decision to keep the word "logo" 
> indicates that you 
> still do not quite understand the function of the alt 
> attribute. The alt 
> attribute text is used to *replace* the image. That means 
> that it serves 
> the same function as the image. It is *not* a label for the image.
> 
> I can tell you right now that the majority of your users do 
> not give a 
> damn that there is a Sheffield City Council logo on your page. The 
> information of importance to them is that this page is 
> associated with 
> the Sheffield City Council. This function is provided exhaustively by 
> the words "Sheffield City Council" alone.
> 
> If you believe that the word logo is necessary to 
> disambiguate the logo 
> from a picture of the council members, then you are 
> mislabeling photos. 
> If you have a picture of the Sheffield City Council members 
> or the town 
> hall and you label it with a simple "Sheffield City Council," 
> then what 
> is the point? What information does this convey to the user who can't 
> see the photo?
> 
> Effectively, you are saying to this user, there is a photo of 
> something 
> here but you can't see it. Too bad for you, eh? IMO, that's simply an 
> annoyance. If you're not going to provide any real information, why 
> bother? Just leave the alt attribute blank.
> 
> A better solution is to provide a description of the photo 
> (via longdesc 
> and/or a d-link), so that the non-visual user can get similar 
> information to that provided by the user. For the logo, the alt 
> attribute should be "Sheffield City Council". If you want to 
> make users 
> aware that this is a logo, simply add title="Logo". But if 
> you do that, 
> go the extra mile and add a description (longdesc and/or 
> d-link) leading 
> to a description of the logo. Otherwise, you are just telling 
> non-visual 
> users that there is information there worth knowing, but that 
> you're not 
> going to bother to provide it to them.
> 
> Similarly, with a photo of the council members or the town 
> hall, add a 
> d-link with a description of the image and leave the alt 
> blank -- unless 
> there is some key tidbit of info the image is supposed to 
> provide, e.g., 
> alt="Note: There are five women and three men on the 
> council." Be aware, 
> however, that not all browsers expand the alt attribute text 
> completely, 
> so if the text is larger than the image, some sighted users 
> with images 
> disabled will not be able to read it: yet another reason to keep your 
> alt attributes succinct.
> 
> Hope this clarifies things a bit. While the alt attribute is widely 
> misunderstood, its intended use is not controversial.
> 
> Sincerely,
> Charles F. Munat
> Seattle, Washington
> 
The information in this email is confidential. The contents may not be disclosed or used by anyone other than the addressee.  If you are not the addressee, please tell us by using the reply facility in your email software as soon as possible. Sheffield City Council cannot accept any responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of this message as it has been transmitted over a public network.  If you suspect that the message may have been intercepted or amended please tell us as soon as possible.

Received on Tuesday, 15 January 2002 12:11:19 UTC