Re: there are markup options [was: Re: img/alt summary attempt]

On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 22:55:06 +0200, Jan Richards  
<jan.richards@utoronto.ca> wrote:
> If I may, I would like to replace "is important" with "CONVEYS  
> INFORMATION", as in:
>
> (1) Image DOES NOT CONVEY INFORMATION, alternative text is available.  
> (alt="")
> (2) Image CONVEYS INFORMATION, alternative text is available. (alt="...")
>
> Now, in my opinion, a missing "alt" attribute actually represents:
>
> (3-REWORDED) Image MAY OR MAY NOT CONVEY INFORMATION and alternative  
> text is not available.

I think here you start to confuse the issue. If an image does not convey  
information there is a clear solution: set the alt attribute to the empty  
string. Whether or not authors actually do that is a matter of  
conformance. If an image does not convey information and has no alt  
attribute specified it is non-conforming. Similarly if an image does  
convey information and alternative text is available setting the alt  
attribute to the empty string would be non-conforming.


> Now, I think there is a fourth state that I see use in representing:
>
> (4-NEW) A tool (CMS, etc.) knows that the image CONVEYS INFORMATION  
> (e.g. someone uploaded it from their camera, so it's probably not a  
> blank placeholder), but alternative text is not available.
>
> That said, I'm not sure how (4) should be represented (e.g., some have  
> suggested something like alt="_none").

This is case three.


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>

Received on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 21:22:52 UTC