- From: Sean Hayes <Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 13:08:51 +0100
- To: Jason White <jason@jasonjgw.net>, "wai-xtech@w3.org" <wai-xtech@w3.org>
I agree that allowing the src as an alternative to the markup content, rather than the other way around is a better solution for many reasons, including accessibility and internationalisation. However XHTML doesnt solve the key issue in what would: <p src="anImage" /> mean to a screen reader? If HTML5 was to ensure img (and related media elements) did not have an EMPTY content model, and used the XHTML interpretation, then yes this would be a win all round and we could indeed drop the alt element. ________________________________________ From: wai-xtech-request@w3.org [wai-xtech-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jason White [jason@jasonjgw.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 11:31 AM To: wai-xtech@w3.org Subject: Re: [html4all] HTML5 Alternative Text, and Authoring Tools On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 11:50:25AM +0200, Christophe Strobbe wrote: > (The alt attribute is not perfect - being an attribute, it doesn't allow > markup inside it - but it is not "bolted on".) I agree that it's badly designed, and I would further argue that XHTML 2.0 solves this particular problem in a principled fashion with its SRC attribute and its definition of IMG as a (legacy) container element. <img src="image.png">Equivalent content goes here.</img> <p src="image.png">Paragraph of text serving as alternative to image (or you could think of the image as an alternative to the text).</p>
Received on Tuesday, 13 May 2008 12:09:34 UTC