Re: img@relaxed CP [was: CfC: Close ISSUE-206: meta-generator by Amicable Resolution]

Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis writes:
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 3:27 AM, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net> wrote:
> > I'd far rather they followed the WAI
> > Ad Hoc guidance fixing thier substandard alt. That would actually
> > improve the experience significantly, whereas Ted's opt out would do
> > nothing to improve things for anyone, including the uploader.
> 
> I'm not sure what you think the @alt would be if they did follow the
> WAI ad hoc guidance. Something like "Photo 876 of 985"? Would that
> really be a significant improvement for consumers of the photo page?
> 
Absolutely. It's precise and that's significant, where "Photo" is
anything but.

Anyone who needs alt is unlikely to spend much time on Flicker to begin
with. So, if someone does have a reason, the x of y precision is exactly the
kind of automated alt that can be helpful. That's why WAI recommended
it.

> > Speaking of the uploader, there's every reason the upload tool could
> > supply the alt strings contemplated by WAI Ad Hoc when the user hasn't
> > bothered to individualize alt on each photo. in this way the WAI solution doesn't
> > even require anything from Flicker to improve alt on Flicker.
> 
> I don't understand what you're talking about.
> 
The client application that a user uses to upload to Flicker can just as easily fill
missing alt with x of y as can Flicker itself.

Janina

> --
> Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis

-- 

Janina Sajka,	Phone:	+1.443.300.2200
			sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net
		Email:	janina@rednote.net

The Linux Foundation
Chair, Open Accessibility:	http://a11y.org

The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
Chair,	Protocols & Formats	http://www.w3.org/wai/pf
	Indie UI			http://www.w3.org/WAI/IndieUI/

Received on Wednesday, 1 August 2012 04:16:14 UTC