On Sat, 04 Nov 2006 12:42:34 +0600, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If <img> without alt is defined to mean that the image is semantically
valuable but without an alternative text, then the problem is that we
need to distinguish between empty and omitted alt in DOM somehow.
That's easy enough; the real problem is that we end up saying that
literally billions of <img> tags are semantically valuable when in all
likelihood they're just decorative images.
The number of <img> tags with a alt="" attribute is about half the number
of <img> tags with a src="" attribute.
(1)
There are also many <img> tags with alt="" which are actually semantically
valuable (2), where alt="" has been inserted automatically by the
authoring tool or manually by the author just to make the document pass
formal validation. I can't say whether (1) or (2) is more widespread.
--
Alexey Feldgendler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[ICQ: 115226275] http://feldgendler.livejournal.com
