- From: Léonie Watson <lwatson@paciellogroup.com>
- Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 17:53:39 -0000
- To: "'T.V Raman'" <raman@google.com>, <jason@jasonjgw.net>
- Cc: <wai-xtech@w3.org>, <w3c-wai-pf@w3.org>
T. V Raman wrote: "... good point re "decorative" images being irrelevant in specific contexts. However the problem remains "decorati ve" for whom? If it were irrelevant for *all* users, then it wouldn't be there in the first place;_)" The discussion around the value of images to blind people has often been somewhat binary: Either an image is decorative or it is not, either an image is of value to blind people or it is not. In reality it isn't that simple of course. People may lose their sight at any time, and for most it happens during adulthood. That means that many blind people have well developed visual recall, and the ability to mentally form images if given the opportunity to do so. I suggested a new categorisation of images in 2007 [1]. I still contend that there is a case for emotion rich/atmospheric images to be given alternative text, but I'm not sure of the value of using ARIA to differentiate them from any other kind of image with an alternative text? Léonie. [1] http://tink.co.uk/2011/06/text-descriptions-emotion-rich-images/ The Paciello Group.
Received on Tuesday, 28 January 2014 17:54:02 UTC