- From: Eric Eggert <w3c@yatil.de>
- Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 19:46:45 +0200
- To: "David Poehlman" <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>
- Cc: "Jon Barnett" <jonbarnett@gmail.com>, "Philip TAYLOR \(Ret'd\)" <P.Taylor@rhul.ac.uk>, "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@opera.com>, "James Graham" <jg307@cam.ac.uk>, "Steven Faulkner" <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>, "W3C WAI-XTECH" <wai-xtech@w3.org>, <public-html@w3.org>
What confuses me about that whole alternative text on flickr issue is that flickr is an edge case, not a typical use case for alternative text. Images on flickr are not part of the content, they are the content and there are some administration options (and a social network) built around that content. The flickr users do a lot to make their images accessible and describe them. There are tags, there’s the description, the title, comments. Each piece of information is worth nothing, neither to a search engine nor to a screen reader software. But as a whole those informations can drae quite a good picture of the image, quite frankly a better picture than the most alt texts give in the web at the moment. What we really need is imo not yet another sub use of the alt attribute but a way to connect those informations to the image and indicating that there is an image in the page even if the alt text is not present. I’m a huge fan of <figure> and <legend> for these use cases. I agree that it has to be our goal to make the web more accessible but forcing users, many without a tech background, to enter an abstract alternative text and a description is too much. Flickr has to depend on their users to enter descriptions that make sense. If flickr would out of the blue require description and/or alternative text, one would find a lot of garbage descriptions there which is the counter effect of what we want to achieve. Eric Eggert David Poehlman wrote: > > accessibility is right not privilige. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jon Barnett" <jonbarnett@gmail.com> > To: "Philip TAYLOR (Ret'd)" <P.Taylor@rhul.ac.uk> > Cc: "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@opera.com>; "David Poehlman" > <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>; "James Graham" <jg307@cam.ac.uk > >; > "Steven Faulkner" <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>; "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch > >; > "W3C WAI-XTECH" <wai-xtech@w3.org>; <public-html@w3.org> > Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 1:12 PM > Subject: Re: Flickr and alt > > > On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 8:25 AM, Philip TAYLOR (Ret'd) > <P.Taylor@rhul.ac.uk>wrote: > >> >> Anne van Kesteren wrote: >> >>> >>> [...]I was trying to point out that Flickr cannot start requiring >>> users to <perform some task> as that will simply kill their >>> business. >>> >> >> Exactly the same argument was adduced about requiring >> public houses to require their customers to either >> refrain from smoking completely, or to smoke outside. >> >> The pubs /didn't/ go out of business, and most of their >> customers came to accept that -- by following the rules -- >> they were improving the environment for everybody. >> >> Philip TAYLOR >> > > > Forcing content on a user-generated content web site, by law, to > meet a set > of accessibility standards is asinine and frightening at the same > time. > There are plenty of countries that would never go for such a thing. > > Smoking laws are a poor analogy. A better analogy would be fining a > restaurant for not forcing everyone in a restaurant to use sign > language > while they talk. > > There is absolutely NO chance I would ever upload 100 photos to a > web site > and write a sentence of text for each picture only to have that > sentence be > invisible to 99% of the public. If I'm going to write 100 sentences, > they're going to be captions viewable alongside a photo and not > alternate > text for a photo. For this reason, I see Flickr as a silly use case > for > @alt as I can only ever foresee Flickr using this: > > <figure> > <img src="image.jpg" whatever-markup-goes-here> > <legend>My wife and myself in front of the Niagra Falls, a proper > description of this image</legend> > </figure> > > As this would be silly (it's redundant): > > <figure> > <img src="image.jpg" alt="My wife and myself in front of the Niagra > Falls, a > proper description of this image"> > <legend>My wife and myself in front of the Niagra Falls, a proper > description of this image</legend> > </figure> > > And this would never happen: > > <figure> > <img src="image.jpg" alt="Proper alternate text I'm going to write > for 100 > images but is only presented when the image is not visible"> > <legend>My wife and myself in front of the Niagra Falls, a proper > description of this image</legend> > </figure> > > I'm also sure at least 50 of those images wouldn't get captioned at > all > because I simply don't have the time. If Flickr suddenly required > me to > caption all 50 of those images, I would just insert junk into the > textbox > for the caption or I would find a photo sharing site without such a > silly > requirement for me, as the user. > > -- > Jon Barnett >
Received on Monday, 18 August 2008 18:40:42 UTC