- From: Geoff Deering <gdeering@acslink.net.au>
- Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 19:22:29 +1100
- To: "David Woolley" <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
-----Original Message----- From: David Woolley * incorrectly. I agree that it might not be necessarily good to have all > graphics turned on, but labeled graphics is certainly within the realm of > expectation for a user of a graphical environment. Surely the problem here is the level of abuse of alt attributes. If you ignore the sites that don't use them at all, you will find a large number of sites that treat them as a Netscape 4 tooltip feature, and a lot that apply token accessibility compliance by providing alt text that matches the image file name, or which is a description rather than an alternative. You will also still find sites (I hit one recently) that use them for keyword stuffing (for search engine manipulation). I'm about at the point that the whole alt text thing is doing more damage for WAI than good. It was relevant years ago, but the landscape has changed and it just should not be much of an issue if developers understand formal grammar, its benefits and just placing appropriate alts on images used appropriately. If developers are still filling their sites with images for filler, etc, they are living in the past and being counter productive. Geoff
Received on Wednesday, 4 February 2004 03:29:14 UTC