Posted by Charles Sweeney on 08/18/05 04:14

Safalra wrote

> The purpose of a logo is to identify the organisation it represents.

Yes but crucially, the purpose of a logo is to *visually* identify the
organisation it represents. Nothing else.

As you go some way towards saying, you cannot represent a purely visual
sensation with words. To try to do so is ludicrous. Therefore the best
you can do is tell the user that there is an image there, and give a
short desription of it.

> In text this is the same as just stating the name of the organisation,

It's not. It's anything but the same. You don't get the mood, the
feel, the ethos, the subliminal influences. A crap logo identifies the
organisation, but also tells you (amongst other things) that they may
not be a serious outfit. Just as a quality logo has the opposite
effect. Text can't do that.

Again, better to give the user the organisation name, and tell them
there's a logo there. Sighted people get the organisation name, and can
choose to view the logo. Blind people still get the organisation name.
What possible drawback can there be to stating that there's a logo
there??

When I surf with images turned off, I find the alt text "picture of..."
very helpful. It tells me first of all that there is an image there,
and it helps me to know if I should choose to view it.

If the alt text says "organisation name logo", I might choose to view it
because I am interested in logos.

If the alt-text does not tell me it's a picture (or logo) then the page
does not read well. I see little snippets of text, but completely out
of sync with the surrounding text. But "picture of..." or "...logo"
tells me all I need to know, and does not get confused with surrounding
text.

--
Charles Sweeney
http://CharlesSweeney.com

[Back to original message]