W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > wai-xtech@w3.org > November 2007

Re: DRAFT response Re[2]: Request for PFWG WAI review of Omitting ?alt Attribute for Critical Content

From: David Poehlman <poehlman1@comcast.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 20:29:42 -0500
Cc: Jason White <jason@jasonjgw.net>, wai-xtech@w3.org
Message-Id: <C884806B-554D-491F-A399-2B13766B400E@comcast.net>
To: "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>

oh, how about:
<a> href="http://www.mylinks.ocm">have no meaning</a>
this is the same thing, what you are pointing to are specification  
media tpes, content types and the like.  What we do not want to do is  
provide yet another twist in the road that is already twisted by  
providing yet another sink hole for people to throw money down.

On Nov 27, 2007, at 7:01 PM, Patrick H. Lauke wrote:

David Poehlman wrote:
> Surely, there is no element or attribute anywhere in any spec that  
> would say, when you publish your documents, not only must you use an  
> alt attrib, you also must write into it that the image is not  
> important if it is not important.

I don't see this as being any different from, say in HTML 4.01,  
recognised link types


recognised media types


IANA registry charsets


etc. Or am I missing something fundamental in your argument?

Patrick H. Lauke
re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively
[latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]
www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk
Co-lead, Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force
Take it to the streets ... join the WaSP Street Team
Received on Wednesday, 28 November 2007 01:30:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 20 January 2023 19:58:27 UTC