- From: Tim <dogstar27@optushome.com.au>
- Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 02:47:53 +1000
- To: WAI Interest Group list <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
- Cc: Alastair Campbell <ac@nomensa.com>
I disagree with you on this point, it is easy to test this. If it is just eye candy, it is not html content, call it as a background image from the stylesheet rules. A stylesheet background image has no alt text but it is also invisible with CSS turned off. Isn't this what stylesheets are for formatting eye candy. I have seven different stylesheet options each with different heading eye candy animated gif files. If I embedded these images in the page html, they might think they are missing something. Put eye candy in the stylesheets not in the html code. Tim http://www.hereticpress.com On 29/08/2007, at 2:20 AM, Alastair Campbell wrote: > > Debi Orton wrote: >> Some users wanted to know what EVERY image was so that they could >> be sure they weren't missing information. Others wanted only >> meaningful images described. > > I've had similar experience, it's somewhat akin to the > hardcore-usability vs holistic-experience divide. > >> We proposed an additional attribute (two values only) for >> the img element to indicate whether the image was informational or >> just eye candy. > > Surely that would be a null alt? ATs can then decide how they deal with > images that have null alts, which is often by ignoring them currently. > > The issue at hand is not spacers, but content images that do not have > useful alts, and no realistic means of adding them. > > I generally agree with Andrew, it's difficult to assess by usability > testing, although on this point: >> This is very important for linked images, but of questionable value > for >> images that are not." > > I think a lot of images in this scenario would be linked, often to > larger versions of scaled-down images. It would be difficult to > distinguish useful from not useful on that basis. > > Kind regards, > > -Alastair > > -- > Alastair Campbell | Director of User Experience > > Nomensa Email Disclaimer: > http://www.nomensa.com/email-disclaimer.html > > > > > > The Editor Heretic Press http://www.hereticpress.com Email dogstar27@optushome.com
Received on Tuesday, 28 August 2007 16:48:21 UTC