Comments on: Should alt text be used to paint a thousand words? http://blogs.cetis.org.uk/accessibility/2007/02/12/should-alt-text-be-used-to-paint-a-thousand-words/ Cetis Blog Fri, 25 Jan 2013 10:26:59 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.22 By: Bilder, User, Social News und Social Communities | Online Marketing Blog http://blogs.cetis.org.uk/accessibility/2007/02/12/should-alt-text-be-used-to-paint-a-thousand-words/#comment-142 Sat, 08 Nov 2008 03:47:15 +0000 http://blogs.cetis.org.uk/accessibility/2007/02/12/should-alt-text-be-used-to-paint-a-thousand-words/#comment-142 […] Alternativ-Texten sind “Writing Alternate Text for Images” von Sarah Horton und “Should alt text be used to paint a thousand words?” im Accessibility […]

]]>
By: mike http://blogs.cetis.org.uk/accessibility/2007/02/12/should-alt-text-be-used-to-paint-a-thousand-words/#comment-141 Fri, 14 Mar 2008 18:34:42 +0000 http://blogs.cetis.org.uk/accessibility/2007/02/12/should-alt-text-be-used-to-paint-a-thousand-words/#comment-141 Sharon,
Interesting, however my blog is approaching a similar issue from a digital imagery in general and fine art in particular argument. The main consensus of my research to-date seems to agree, that an image requires a caption / title, as an aid to understanding that image and that is the point, the artist does not need to explain the meaning of the image. It could be argued that the onus is with the artist to give guidance to possible meanings which is for the viewer to explore.

]]>
By: Avoiding the Gray Areas - Curb Cut http://blogs.cetis.org.uk/accessibility/2007/02/12/should-alt-text-be-used-to-paint-a-thousand-words/#comment-140 Sat, 08 Mar 2008 18:48:49 +0000 http://blogs.cetis.org.uk/accessibility/2007/02/12/should-alt-text-be-used-to-paint-a-thousand-words/#comment-140 […] Should alt text be used to paint a thousand words? […]

]]>
By: Sharon Perry http://blogs.cetis.org.uk/accessibility/2007/02/12/should-alt-text-be-used-to-paint-a-thousand-words/#comment-139 Mon, 23 Apr 2007 10:13:04 +0000 http://blogs.cetis.org.uk/accessibility/2007/02/12/should-alt-text-be-used-to-paint-a-thousand-words/#comment-139 Further to this argument, the use of alt text to describe decorative images and emotional concepts has been blogged on the E-Access blog: Now You See It, Now You Don’t.

]]>
By: Sharon http://blogs.cetis.org.uk/accessibility/2007/02/12/should-alt-text-be-used-to-paint-a-thousand-words/#comment-138 Mon, 19 Feb 2007 17:01:08 +0000 http://blogs.cetis.org.uk/accessibility/2007/02/12/should-alt-text-be-used-to-paint-a-thousand-words/#comment-138 Houbi.com has an entry on his blog – http://houbi.com/blog/styling-alt-tags – about Styling Alt Tags, which might not have been obvious from his post. He has managed to get the alt tag to have a style associated with it like normal text.

]]>
By: Colin Lieberman http://blogs.cetis.org.uk/accessibility/2007/02/12/should-alt-text-be-used-to-paint-a-thousand-words/#comment-137 Fri, 16 Feb 2007 17:18:23 +0000 http://blogs.cetis.org.uk/accessibility/2007/02/12/should-alt-text-be-used-to-paint-a-thousand-words/#comment-137 I think that arguments such as “The photo contains emotional content that I’m not qualified to relate in words” are complete cop outs.

These authors are forgetting the purpose of the alt attribute: to convey some information about the image (other than “PIC01837463.JPG”) to users who can not perceive the visusal content of the image, such as the googlebot, and users with vision disabilities.

In the case of these dance images, the googlebot just needs some content it can show in search results “photo of a dance performance”. This same alt text works just as well for a person who is blind.

The blind user is a mature, thinking human being, who probablly is very well aware that he or she will never get the same content from an image that a sighted user would. However, the alt text is there so this user can put the images into the context of the rest of the site: She now knows there are 14 images of dancing, rather than a whole bunch of JAWS-babble “img: PIC0034738.JPG”.

Even short alt text provides context, and improves the sound of the site to users of screen readers. It’s completely unnecessary to try to convey the exact same content. It is necessary to make a bit of effort to convey that there are in fact images (don’t use alt=”” where inapropriate), and what their subject matter is.

]]>
By: Styling alt tags at houbi.com Blog http://blogs.cetis.org.uk/accessibility/2007/02/12/should-alt-text-be-used-to-paint-a-thousand-words/#comment-136 Fri, 16 Feb 2007 14:33:43 +0000 http://blogs.cetis.org.uk/accessibility/2007/02/12/should-alt-text-be-used-to-paint-a-thousand-words/#comment-136 […] on the subject of alt-tags, read this accessibility blog entry: Should alt text be used to paint a thousand words? Filed under Uncategorized.  | var blogTool = “WordPress”; var blogURL = […]

]]>
By: Andy Heath http://blogs.cetis.org.uk/accessibility/2007/02/12/should-alt-text-be-used-to-paint-a-thousand-words/#comment-135 Thu, 15 Feb 2007 00:33:32 +0000 http://blogs.cetis.org.uk/accessibility/2007/02/12/should-alt-text-be-used-to-paint-a-thousand-words/#comment-135 Wonderful piece Sharon.
Adrian, I agree with your comments about purpose.

I think there are still some very interesting questions around the provision of alternatives (not just alternatives for visual) when there is emotional or artistic purpose. My guess if you asked an artist to define what is art is that they would say its completely dependant on context. Art that makes sense in one context (say 19th century France) would not have the same effect in a different one (say modern Britain). That notion does not stop at cultures but extends to individuals too. Perception and understanding are not static and passive they are active. We participate in them and we are all very different. Also a painting or a poem or a piece of music is much more than its content and maybe much more than its purpose. A description of an emotion is not the same as the emotion. This is what makes art, poetry, education (and in fact even life) such fun – its guesswork. We simply don’t know how something will be perceived by anyone at all, so we guess, and in that approximate guesswork is the possibilty that we are completely wrong or very innacurate. But we try and that’s the point.

We must do our best to provide materials in ways that best communicate to whoever the audience may be. A different experience is still worthwhile.

I am minded of the work my cycling group is doing to support cycling for blind people by providing tandem riding. Of course this is a totally different experience to solo cycling and even to sighted tandem riding but its still a wonderful experience.

Art is I think a communication. Each of us will have a different emotional response. That doesn’t matter and doesn’t invalidate the experience. The communication is between the author (who had the purpose) and the recipient (who has the perception mechanisms whatever they are). It *isn’t* about dead material.

What I’m saying is that purpose is all, because its an indispensable part of communication and since its communication we are trying to do we should try to do that and that requires providing our best efforts to meet perception requirements that we may not be used to providing because they are different to what we are used to.

I don’t believe in art for the elite, which is what it would be if we didn’t try to communicate with everyone that was in the audience.

andy

]]>
By: Adrian Higginbotham http://blogs.cetis.org.uk/accessibility/2007/02/12/should-alt-text-be-used-to-paint-a-thousand-words/#comment-134 Tue, 13 Feb 2007 13:00:39 +0000 http://blogs.cetis.org.uk/accessibility/2007/02/12/should-alt-text-be-used-to-paint-a-thousand-words/#comment-134 excellent piece Sharon which captures much of the essence of the whole accessibility debate, not just descriptions of images on Websites. what is it for, who is it for and who should do it…
to address the questions you raised:
1. How can one describe an image that expresses emotion or abstract concepts?
Answer: in a learning context the description is there to describe the purpose of the image rather than necessarily its exact features. Descriptions like the images themselves are contextual. is understanding the emotion essential to completing the objective? only if it is do you need to describe it.
2.  If such concepts can be described, who should be responsible (and have the capability) for doing so?
Answer: following from #1 above. it is essential that the person selecting the image is the one who describes it. It is only they who can explain why it was chosen and who can describe it in such a way as to not present a barrier to achieving the objective. It is no good having a description of an image which says ‘happy girl’ or ‘girl in a green dress’ if the objective is to assess the mood of the girl. the author has the responsibility and by the nature of having selected the image must have the ability to describe its purpose.

3.  Where does alt text fit into all this?
Answer: ‘alt’ is simply a technical tool, one tag in one language, it isn’t the door to paradise any more than a single textual description is the key to that door. alt can be used to describe the purpose of an image, or the image itself but it isn’t the only way of doing either, nor would we want it to be. alt has many disadvantages as well as much in its favour. As long ago as 1999 we took the decision to remove alt tags and place the descriptions in the body of text in courses both because they were useful to all students and also because it made writing them much easier for expert authors who struggled to get to grips with the ‘extra’ alt tags.

]]>