Sorry Georg, I appreciate the time you took in posting your response,
but I think you misunderstood my question.
I wasn't asking what was the opinion on the appropriateness of alt/title
text in a general sense, but what the opinion was on the purpose of the
image that was in question... is it purely aesthetic or does it convey
its own meaning (i.e. is it symbolic of its own message).
It's purely elementary of course, but the different interpretations are
a reason why the opinion is split.
Cheers,
David.
Gunlaug Sørtun wrote:
David Dixon wrote:
[...]
It would be useful to get a few more opinions on what others believe
the purpose is...
The purpose of 'text' in the alt-attribute it to expand/complete the
meaning - in context, (as close to) the same as the visible image itself
does.
Describing the image is not what the alt-attribute is there for.
An image may tell a "story", and/or strengthen (parts of) the
surrounding content. The alt-text should (ideally speaking) do the same
- or be left out.
Whatever one puts in that alt-attribute should make optimal sense - in
context. If it doesn't, then an alt="" is to be preferred in nearly all
cases.
---
The 'graphical' "version" should not influence or "cross-contaminate"
the 'text-only' "version" of a page at the User end.
Few 'text-only' Users can, or do, compare.
The 'text-only' "version" should carry _all_ that is relevant - and not
much else, while the 'graphical' may provide space for all the relevant,
less-relevant and/or non-relevant visual cues one may want to put in.
---
Images can, and often do, add value - when visible, as visual cues
along with text works well - visually.
Text - followed by an image - followed by more text, may work well in
most cases - for those of us who can see it all and scan in all directions.
---
Providing loss-less alternatives inside alt-attributes is impossible for
most images.
Providing short alternatives in context is somewhat easier, but most
often not necessary, or useful.
Very often the only logical alt-text for an image is a repetition, or
rewrite, of what's already in the text. Such a "logical" but repetitive
alt-text doesn't add anything of value. Repetitive, rewritten or 'out of
context' text adds noise, so it makes little or no sense to have any
alt-text.
Text - followed by a rewrite of the same or 'an out of context' text
(disguised as an "accessibility-improving" alt-attribute) - followed by
more (of the same) text, rarely ever make much sense.
Georg
******************************************************
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
******************************************************
