- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1999 14:56:33 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Dave J Woolley <DJW@bts.co.uk>
- cc: "'www-amaya@w3.org'" <www-amaya@w3.org>
Right. I use Lynx most of the time - it's fast. I use Amaya if I am editing stuff, which I do for a fair number of hours a day, and I use some other browser if I need to deal with tag-soup masquerading as HTML. Since accessibility is my job, I am encouraged by the fact that the sue of ALT is actually a lot better than it was two years ago, although I agree that there are still too many people who don't see the value of it. And too many tools that make it difficult to use it well. (I would appreciate feedback on the image help page of Amaya, which deals with using alt as part of the process. But I don't know how many people read documentation...) Charles McCN On Wed, 8 Sep 1999, Dave J Woolley wrote: > For a lot of users, missing ALT is the single most critical problem in > being > able to use a website. That is why it is required by the DTD, and is one > example of why validating to the DTD is as important as working with > browsers. > Actually I agree, in part because I sometimes use Lynx, however missing ALT is probably the most common HTML error and accounted for most of the validation errors, so I wanted to point out that the failed pages didn't just fail on that point. Requiring it in the DTD, unfortunately, doesn't solve the problem as it is easy to shut up a validator by using alt="", if you are energetic, or leaving it as alt="silly-picture.gif (100MB)". Even people who actually key something in rarely think about why it's really there. --Charles McCathieNevile mailto:charles@w3.org phone: +1 617 258 0992 http://www.w3.org/People/Charles W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI MIT/LCS - 545 Technology sq., Cambridge MA, 02139, USA
Received on Wednesday, 8 September 1999 14:56:37 UTC