WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Not versus, but plus (was: ALT tag vs. LONGDESC)

for

From: Kevin Price
Date: Mar 7, 2002 3:33PM

John,
Thanks for your comments.
JAWS 4.01 reads LONGDESC tags now in Internet Explorer 5.x and 6.
Kevin Price

At 05:01 PM 3/7/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>Kevin,
>
>EVERY <img> requires the ALT attribute, some *May* also require the LONGDESC
>attribute on top of the ALT attribute. If the image is conveying
>information beyond what would be on the surface, then employ the LONGDESC
>attribute which links to a text file with a fuller explanation.
>
>For example, you have a web page with an image of a pie chart:
>
> <img src="piechart.gif" height="300" width="300" alt="pie chart
> showing
>browser usage statistics" longdesc="/longdesc/piechart.html">
>
>For non-graphic browsers, the alt tag is describing "what" the image is,
>however, should the user wish to "see" what the percentages are, they would
>follow the LONGDESC link to "piechart.html" which would be a text version of
>the browser usage stats (it could be a simple .txt file as well).
>
>To my knowledge, currently only IBM's HomePage reader supports the LONGDESC
>attribute, so you may also see the "d" link used. While not a W3C
>recommendation (nor I believe Section 508), some advocacy groups propose it
>as a stop-gap measure while waiting for the browsers/assistive software to
>catch up:
>
> <img src="piechart.gif" height="300" width="300" alt="pie chart
> showing
>browser usage" longdesc="/longdesc/piechart.html"><a
>href="/longdesc/piechart.html" title="text description of user stats">d</a>
>
>Some feel that the d-link is "ugly", but you could set the colour of that
>link as the same colour as your page background (when browsers universally
>support the visibility attribute of CSS2 you could use that as well):
>
> <a href="pichart.html" title="text description of user stats"
>style="visibility: hidden; color: White; font-size: 1pt;">d</a>
>
><opinion>
>While normally I would say that we should never set font sizes as absolutes,
>I'm also a believer of exceptions to every rule, and this would be one of
>them. It could be argued that this may remove the link from text only
>browsers, but generally they rarely (if ever) support style sheets anyway,
>and we all need to accept the fact that aesthetics DO play a role in our
>work. The d link is not mandated anywhere, it's inclusion is simply one
>more assistive coding device that web developers may apply, and speech
>browsers/screen readers will still "hear" this link. It's a balance thing,
>and IMHO I've added more than I've removed...
></opinion>
>
>The bottom line however is the use of LONGDESC is a judgement call, which is
>one of the reasons why an automated "compliancy tester" (i.e.: Bobby or
>equiv) is never the final word... it's a great testing tool, but not the
>only one you should use (I believe even Bobby's web site says something to
>the equivalent)
>
>HTH
>
>JF
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >