W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > wai-xtech@w3.org > August 2008

Re: Request for clarification of 'In many cases, the image is actually just supplementary'

From: Philip TAYLOR (Ret'd) <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 09:41:57 +0100
Message-ID: <48A935D5.3040703@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
To: Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
CC: W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>, "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>

Steven Faulkner wrote:

> So would the example below be non-conforming?

> <p>The network passes data to the Tokeniser stage, which
> passes data to the Tree Construction stage. From there, data goes
> to both the DOM and to Script Execution. Script Execution is
> linked to the DOM, and, using document.write(), passes data to
> the Tokeniser.</p>
> <p><img src="images/parsing-model-overview.png" alt="Flowchart
> representation of the preceding paragraph."></p>

I don't know.  But what happens when user-CSS causes all
image to be removed from the normal flow, such that
"the preceding paragraph" can no longer be relied
upon to be accurate ?  And would it make any difference
if all paragraphs were numbered, and your ALT text read
"Flowchart representation of para.~1.3.1" ?

Received on Monday, 18 August 2008 08:42:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:25:22 UTC