E-mail List Archives
RE: Blank alt attributes for images - best practise?
From: FOX, Jake
Date: Oct 6, 2003 7:55AM
- Next message: julian.rickards@ndm.gov.on.ca: "RE: Blank alt attributes for images - best practise?"
- Previous message: Nancy Swenson: "Re: Next and Previous Accesskey"
- Next message in Thread: gez: "Re: Blank alt attributes for images - best practise?"
- Previous message in Thread: None
- View all messages in this Thread
Just a suggestion but there are examples where images have used alt="*" for
similar situations.
This at least provides some content in the alt tag and doesn't seem as if
anything's missing that should be there.
It implies that the tag was meant to be left empty as opposed to being left
empty accidentally.
would like to hear everyone else's views on this...
-Jake.
**********************************************************************
This email and any files sent with it are intended only for the named
recipient. If you are not the named recipient please telephone/email
the sender immediately. You should not disclose the content or
take/retain/distribute any copies.
**********************************************************************
Norwich Union Life & Pensions Limited
Registered Office: 2 Rougier Street, York, YO90 1UU
Registered in England Number 3253947
A member of the Norwich Union Marketing Group
Members of which are Authorised and Regulated by the Financial Services Authority.
For further enquiries 01603 622200
----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, suspend, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
- Next message: julian.rickards@ndm.gov.on.ca: "RE: Blank alt attributes for images - best practise?"
- Previous message: Nancy Swenson: "Re: Next and Previous Accesskey"
- Next message in Thread: gez: "Re: Blank alt attributes for images - best practise?"
- Previous message in Thread: None
- View all messages in this Thread