An alt attribute is not a label or description for the image. This is not an immediately obvious distinction. In fact, it might seem natural to assume that alternate text is a label or a description.
It is not.
The words used should be a text equivalent and convey the same information/serve the same purpose as the image.
The aim is to provide the same functional information that the visual user sees. The alt text should be a "stand in" if you will if the image is missing. The test is, when you replace the image with the text would everyone do the same thing/receive the same information as best as possible?
Some examples:
- If a search button is a magnifying glass or binoculars its alt text should be 'search' or 'find' not 'magnifying glass' or 'binoculars'.
- If an image is meant to convey an image - then a description is appropriate.
- If it is meant to convey data - then that is what is appropriate.
- If it is meant to convey a function then that is what should be there.
Some Alt Attribute Guidelines:
- Always add alt attributes to images. Alt is andatory for accessibility and for valid (X)HTML.
- For images that play only a decorative role in the page use an empty alt (i.e. alt="") or a CSS background image so that reading browsers do not bother users by uttering things like "spacer image".
- Remember it is the function of the image we are trying to convey. For instance any button images should not include the word "button" in the alt text. They should emphasize the action performed by the button.
- Alt text should be determined by context. The same image in a different context may need drastically different alt text.
- Try to flow alt text with the rest of the text because that is how it will be read with adaptive technologies like screen readers.Someone listening to your page should hardly be aware that there is a graphic there.
It is useful to categorize non-text content into three levels:
1. Eye-Candy:
Eye-Candy are things that serve no purpose other than to make a site visually appealing/attractive and (in many cases) satisfy the marketing departments. There is no content value (though there may be value to a sighted user). Never alt-ify eye-candy unless there is something there which will enhance the usability of the site for someone using a non-visual user agent. Use a null alt attribute or background images in CSS for eye-candy.
2. Mood-Setting:
This is the middle layer of graphics which may serve to set the mood or set the stage as it were. These graphics are not direct content and may not be considered essential, but they are important in that they help frame what is going on. Try to alt-ify the second group as makes sense and is relevant. There may be times when doing so may be annoying or detrimental to other users. Then try to avoid it.
For instance ALT text that is identical to an adjacent text is unnecessary, and an irritant to screen reader users. I recommend alt="" or background CSS images in such cases. But sometimes, it's important to get this content in there for all users. Most times it depends on context. The same image in a different context may need drastically different alt text. Obviously, content should always be fully available. The way you go in this case is a judgment call.
3. Content/Function:
This is where the image is the actual content. Always alt-ify content and functional images. Title and long description attributes may also be in order.
The reason many authors can't figure out why their alt text isn't working is that they don't know why the images are there. You need to figured out exactly what function an image serves. Think about what it is about the image that's important to the page's intended audience.
Every graphic has a reason for being on that page: because it either enhances the theme/ mood/ atmosphere or it is critical to what the page is trying to explain. Knowing what the image is for makes alt text easier to write. And practice writing them definitely helps.
A way to check the usefulness of alternative text is to imagine reading the page over the telephone to someone. What would you say when encountering a particular image to make the page understandable to the listener?
Besides the alt attribute you have a couple more tools at your disposal for images.
First, in degree of descriptiveness title is in between alt and longdesc. It adds useful information and can add flavor. The title attribute is optionally rendered by the user agent. Remember they are invisible and not shown as a "tooltip" when focus is received via the keyboard. (So much for device independence). So use the title attribute only for advisory information.
Second, the longdesc attribute points to the URL of a full description of an image. If the information contained in an image is important to the meaning of the page (i.e. some important content would be lost if the image was removed), a longer description than the "alt" attribute can reasonably display should be used. It can provide for rich, expressive documentation of a visual image.
It should be used when alt and title are insufficient to embody the visual qualities of an image. As Clark [1] states, "A longdesc is a long description of an image...The aim is to use any length of description necessary to impart the details of the graphic.
It would not be remiss to hope that a long description conjures an image - the image - in the mind's eye, an analogy that holds true even for the totally blind."
Although the alt attribute is mandatory for accessibility and for valid (X)HTML, not all images need alternative text, long descriptions, or titles.
In many cases, you are better off just going with our gut instinct -- if it's not necessary to include it, and if you don't have a strong urge to do it, don't add that longdesc.
However, if it's necessary for the whole page to work, then you have to add the alt text (or title or longdesc).
What's necessary and what's not depends a lot on the function of your image and its context on the page.
The same image may require alt text (or title or longdesc) in one spot, but not in another. If an image provides absolutely no content or functional information alt="" or background CSS images may be appropriate to use. But if the image provides content or adds functional information an alt would be required and maybe even a long description would be in order. In many cases this type of thing is a judgement call.
---------------
[1] http://joeclark.org/book/sashay/seri...Chapter06.html
Related References:
http://www.d.umn.edu/goto/accessibility#alt
Submit Your Article
Forum Rules
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Webnauts
