Hi!
xin:
>>> I'm a bit confused by this request. Either the pictures convey some
>>> useful information, and then they need an alt text, or they don't, and
>>> then perhaps they should not be present at all, no? (But I guess I'm
>>> grossly over-simplifying :) I'll leave it to sajolida to handle this.
>
> Sometimes, images are only usefull to know what a thing looks like
> (logo, some screenshots) and have no additional information who can be
> add in a alt.
>
>> alt-tags are important for blind people, even when they just describe
>> what the image says.
>>
>> I could not review the branch from the website because the repo is
>> private or something, but I think accessibility in HTML always requires
>> alt tags, even if they are simply 'logo'.
>
> I know the importance of alt, on lot of websites alt are misused and are
> just noise to blind people. Sometimes, the alt value have to be empty.
>
> For exemple, in download page, I remove "Wait" alt because after you
> have the text "Please wait".
> Alt can be empty if the information was already in the text around.
>
> About web version of my repo, it's a known issue, you have to use git.
>From a web accessibility point of view, it's good to either have
alt="Something descriptive" or an empty alt="" - as said by xin.
See
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/Img#Attributes.
Quoting from there:
"Setting this attribute to an empty string (alt="") indicates that this
image is not a key part of the content, and that non-visual browsers may
omit it from rendering."
I did not look at the branch but it should not completely remove the
alt, just its contents when necessary.
Cheers!
u.
