|
|
Posted by mbstevens on 08/04/06 17:04
On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 17:49:38 +0100, David Dorward wrote:
> mbstevens wrote:
>
>> Well, as long as we're going to be _fanciful_, I would prefer:
>> alt = "logo of the Foo corporation -- flock of vultures attacking a
>> rabbit which is sitting atop a pyramid with an eye on it"
>>
>> The information that it _is_ a logo is of some importance to
>> _some_ people.
>
> But is it important in the context of the document?
I believe that if I were blind, I would want to know not only
what the company was, but that I was 'looking' at a logo.
>
> In most cases the purpose of displaying a logo is to brand a page, not to
> inform people what the logo looks like.
If the logo actually has an image that is not a
non-objective image, the web author should also give a description of it.
Again, that's what I would want to 'see' if I were unsighted. Do note that
I peppered my last post with "some". I can't speak for everyone, but
that's the kind of information I would want.
(Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you and Allen are actually
whacking me about what you might call sloppy pedagogy on my part.
I shall consider myself properly chastised, and will include a full
length, highly fanciful alt text on future examples -- or, at least
I will if I feel energetic enough.)
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|