E-mail List Archives
Re: Opinions/Facts on Alt Images
From: Tim Harshbarger
Date: May 31, 2016 1:41PM
- Next message: Jared Smith: "Re: Opinions/Facts on Alt Images"
- Previous message: Chagnon | PubCom: "Re: Opinions/Facts on Alt Images"
- Next message in Thread: Jared Smith: "Re: Opinions/Facts on Alt Images"
- Previous message in Thread: Chagnon | PubCom: "Re: Opinions/Facts on Alt Images"
- View all messages in this Thread
I think it would be difficult to claim the pictures are just decorative. I suspect they are present to allow someone using the directory to be able to identify the person.
I was going to suggest that alt="" would be ok since the information is redundant due to the name--but I guess that doesn't make sense. If you removed all the names and replaced them with just the images, the directory would be pretty worthless.
And it appears Bevi answered the question that might go something like "If someone uses the alt text to identify the picture, then they can't be using the picture to identify the people. So why include the alt text?" Apparently, as long as the alt text identifies the image, the user at least as has the option to use the picture for the intended user task--to identify the person. It really isn't for me to say how they go about doing that or what degree of disability they need to have before they would use an alt text. Thanks for the information, Bevi.
- Next message: Jared Smith: "Re: Opinions/Facts on Alt Images"
- Previous message: Chagnon | PubCom: "Re: Opinions/Facts on Alt Images"
- Next message in Thread: Jared Smith: "Re: Opinions/Facts on Alt Images"
- Previous message in Thread: Chagnon | PubCom: "Re: Opinions/Facts on Alt Images"
- View all messages in this Thread