W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > October to December 2004

RE: Alt is not a description (was Re: when to use longdesc for images)

From: John Colby <John.Colby@uce.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 14:00:19 -0000
Message-ID: <107DE25EC0216C45AEF670016024245F022A713A@exchangea.staff.uce.ac.uk>
To: Léonie Watson <lw@nomensa.com>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>

	-----Original Message----- 
	From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org on behalf of Léonie Watson 

	David Dorward wrote:-
	    "The prose suggests giving a description of images which are
	decorative. Why? What benefit does it bring to users to know that
	there is a "Drawing of a house" somewhere in a document if they cannot
	see it and the only purpose of the image is to _look_ nice?"
	   If the image of the house serves no purpose, then it probably shouldn't
	be there. If it serves the purpose of adding colour and vivacity to a
	document, then there is absolutely no reason why both sighted and non
	sighted users shouldn't participate in that emotive aspect. Both user groups
	will have some appreciation of what a house is, or more importantly what it
	represents. Their respective interpretations of exactly what a house looks
	like may well differ, but fundamentally it will achieve the same goal.

	Is this not the purpose of background images in CSS? Enhancing the looks of the page whilst not adding to the content?


Received on Tuesday, 21 December 2004 14:01:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:36:23 UTC