WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: no alt-text: lesser of two evils?


From: Jackson, Derek
Date: Jul 26, 2018 7:27AM

Thank you all for your help. I think we will go the "image description not available" route. Although not necessarily more accessible it is more honest to me.

Thanks again!


From: WebAIM-Forum < <EMAIL REMOVED> > on behalf of Isabel Holdsworth < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2018 6:59:40 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] no alt-text: lesser of two evils?

I like this "image description not available" approach: it would spur
grumpy users like me on to contact the provider to ask why they can't
be bothered to add a simple description :-)

On 25/07/2018, glen walker < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
> Are the images ever decorative? If not, then the alt text should never be
> omitted or empty. If the content provider does not specify an alt text,
> then you can provide a "image description not available" type of alt text.
> That obviously doesn't help the end user with the image, but at least they
> know the image is there and can follow up on it.
> If images *can* be decorative and alt text is not provided, then you should
> have an empty alt text. You should never leave the alt attribute off
> unless you have aria-hidden="true". It's the content providers fault if
> they had an image that has meaning but didn't provide that meaning. Their
> image will be ignored.
> > > > >