[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       quanta
Subject:    Re: [Quanta] [html]: How to set alt="" as default in <img>
From:       obennett <obennett () hartford ! edu>
Date:       2005-03-10 14:42:43
Message-ID: 200503100942.43978.obennett () hartford ! edu
[Download RAW message or body]

On Thursday 10 March 2005 04:26, Lars Behrens wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 9. März 2005 16:47 schrieb Andras Mantia:
> > What I told is that if you use <img src="image.png" alt=""> your
> > document will be valid according to the standard, but any user who
> > tries to view the page with a text-only browser or maybe even with a
> > browser where downloading images is turned off will see a broken
> > page.
by broken page i think he means no indication of where your images are 
supposed to be
>
> Just took a look:
>
> Links: Shows nothing no matter with alt="" or if omitted
> Opera: Shows nothing with alt="", prints "Image" if omitted
> w3m: Shows name of image no matter with alt="" or if omitted
> Links: Shows nothing no matter with alt="" or if omitted
> Konqueror: Shows nothing no matter with alt="" or if omitted or if
>            alt="foo"
> Mozilla: Shows nothing no matter with alt="" or if omitted
>
> The majority of user agents shows just nothing, no broken page.
but there is no indication that you have images present which is what the alt 
text is supposed to do. If you're going to include it just to make your page 
validate and not for the actual purpose of providing information necessary 
for users not able to see your images then you might as well not include it 
all really.
>but I think i
> Does somenone know, how screenreaders behave?
screen readers obviously can't "see" the images so they would have to rely on 
the alt="..." description you provide them, when they get to the images they 
should then read the description. I haven't tested this particular behavior 
but it is possible to do using the Opera 8 windows beta which features voice 
capabilities. CLI browsers also have to rely on the alt text to show that 
there is *something* there which can't be rendered.
>
> > Quanta does the same for every other attribute as well: if it's empty,
> > it removes it.
>
> But I would consider the alt attribute as a special case. Or am I wrong?
I think your right, it is special, but not because it's required to validate 
strict pages. It's special because of what it allows you to do. It gives you 
the ability to help disabled users of your site(s) to get as much information 
as possible. You also get to provide this information to users whose UA may 
not be able to or has been configured to not show images by default.
Think of a mobile phone user who turns of images by default for example: 
quanta has included alt="" for various image descriptions and you forgotten 
to change them. The user is looking for an image and forgets that the browser 
is configured to not show images by default. Maybe he gets referred to a 
gallery and just assumes that it has not been finished yet and both you and 
he 
You seem to not be thinking about any browsers other than GUI ones which is ok 
since you know what your audience is likely to use. I'm definitely not about 
advocating someone use/do something they don't want to do just because they 
are being pressured into it. I personally fell that even though they may 
represent a small minority of users alternative users agents should be 
allowed to take away as much information from the sight as possible.
>
> > If you really want to cheat Quanta use alt=" ", but I would strongly
> > recommend against doing so.
>
> Ack, that's no solution.
>
> > Instead just insert some useful text
> > there and you will make everybody happy: Quanta, the users and the
> > validators.
>
> Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about useful text, of course I
> insert that. But you can't always insert useful text.
> For example picture galleries, they are completely useless for text
> browsers.
That would be the perfect time to use alt. alt="vacation image 1" etc is far 
more useful than just alt="" for a text browser.
>
> Or "to the top" or "Home" links on the page, where you put additional
> little images, a non graphic ua would see or read:
>   to the topto the top
> *that* would be abroken page.
>
> Or images where you already provide a describing text, the alt tag is
> completely redundant here:
>
>      picture of cryostat
>
>   cryostat with 2 Tesla-magnet for
>   NMR-measurements at temperatures
>   down to 1.6 K
>
> I imagine a blind person will go nuts with all that double information.
In this case i personally don't think less is more and we come back to my 
(very) basic argument that you still need some sort of alt description. for 
the example given above since a description is already provided below (for 
the benefit of "sighted" viewers alt="image 1" etc would be necessary and 
then below it we have a description of image on and so on.
>
> Hope you don't misunderstand me, I don't want to be nitpicking. So when
> you tell me there is no way at the time being, I'll work around it  and
> add a wish to the wish list, maybe there are more people who would like
> that option.
>
Hope I haven't been too annoying thanks for letting a kid rant a little :-)
/me walks away and gets back to work...
> Cheerz Lars
>
> _______________________________________________
> Quanta mailing list
> Quanta@mail.kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/quanta

-- 
Jesus loves me. You should too.
_______________________________________________
Quanta mailing list
Quanta@mail.kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/quanta

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]