- From: Marghanita da Cruz <marghanita@ramin.com.au>
- Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 10:03:53 +1000
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- CC: Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie>, John Foliot <foliot@wats.ca>, 'Tomas Caspers' <tomas@tomascaspers.de>, wai-xtech@w3.org, wai-liaison@w3.org, public-html@w3.org, 'HTML4All' <list@html4all.org>
Ian Hickson wrote: > On Tue, 15 Apr 2008, Joshue O Connor wrote: >> Ian Hickson wrote: >>> There is *absolutely no practical difference* to the UA between >>> omitting the alt="" attribute altogether, and having the alt="" >>> attribute set to some magical reserved value. They are functionally >>> identical, and user agents can get as much information from either. >> Thats not entirely true. If you consider a UA like a screen reader which >> will pretty much by default skip images that have a null alt value and >> the other situation you cite where there is some reserved value that >> will potentially trigger some kind of behaviour (which is undefined as >> yet). The difference (an benefit) of this magical reserved value is that >> the user may be able to choose to also ignore it via some verbosity >> settings. Without this 'magical reserved value' the screen reader will >> potentially default into heuristic evaluation which is not desirable >> when interacting with an application - such as the much vaunted photo >> sharing application - and its dynamically generated/random alphanumeric >> URLs. [1] > > I don't understand. Why can't whatever behaviour will happen for > alt="magic vlaue" also happen when the alt="" attribute isn't present? In > both cases we're talking about future tools, and in both cases we're > presumably talking about the same behaviour. I agree that the users of > legacy tools are screwed either way (magic value or missing attribute, > both will result in a poor user experience for these images in today's > UAs, though the missing alt case at least typically has user prefs so that > the user can tweak those cases, another reason why I personally prefer > simply omitting the alt="" attribute rather than introducing keywords). > Isn't the problem that historically features have been coded in what was available? What appears to be needed is the HTML 5 expression of the multiple uses of alt="" rather than ignoring its existance. the use of title doesn't seem consistent either. Some may be interested in the results of the strawpoll I did on the display of alt text. See: <http://www.ramin.com.au/linux/html-strawpolls.shtml> Marghanita -- Marghanita da Cruz http://www.ramin.com.au Phone: (+61)0414 869202
Received on Friday, 18 April 2008 23:59:46 UTC