Re: [whatwg] Conformance for Mail clients (and maybe other WYSIWYGeditors)

2007-04-11 Thread Kristof Zelechovski
:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Maciej Stachowiak Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 10:22 AM To: WHAT working group Subject: [whatwg] Conformance for Mail clients (and maybe other WYSIWYGeditors) This topic came up on #html-wg today. Mail.app and other mail clients don't put alt attributes on images

Re: [whatwg] Conformance for Mail clients (and maybe other WYSIWYGeditors)

2007-04-11 Thread Maciej Stachowiak
On Apr 11, 2007, at 2:01 AM, Kristof Zelechovski wrote: I think the correct fallback for a photograph for its own sake is alt=(Use a browser that supports graphic images to view). If you really want to be anal about the spec, I don't think this would truly represent text with an

Re: [whatwg] Conformance for Mail clients (and maybe other WYSIWYGeditors)

2007-04-11 Thread James Graham
Kristof Zelechovski wrote: I think the correct fallback for a photograph for its own sake is alt=(Use a browser that supports graphic images to view). Not much use to a blind user, for example. (Of course arguably flickr as a whole isn't much use to a blind user but that alt text still seems

Re: [whatwg] Conformance for Mail clients (and maybe other WYSIWYGeditors)

2007-04-11 Thread Martin Atkins
Kristof Zelechovski wrote: I think the correct fallback for a photograph for its own sake is alt=(Use a browser that supports graphic images to view). That is basically what happens if you omit the alt attribute altogether. My graphical browsers (when I turn off images) write Image in place