Re: WCAG 1.0 or 2.0?

On 10/19/06, John Foliot <foliot@wats.ca> wrote:
>
> Chris, if you feel that the following is "perfectly reasonable":
>
> A photo on Flickr.
> A photo on Flickr.
>
...


When you put it _that way_ I have to agree that it's tedious and unhelpful.

Maybe to Flickr's credit, they also supply title attributes for the image
elements, and those have meaningful text. In the best case scenario, the
user would see/hear "A photo on Flickr: Chris spilling ice cream on himself
in Barbados." On the other hand, there's no guarantee that any given
browser/screen reader would render the attributes like that, and it really
seems that the tags have been added more to provide tool tips that
accessibility.

I'm not looking to pick on you specifically Chris (you just opened the door
> for me to go on...)


Glad to be opening doors.

Chris