<body>
<img src="cake.png" alt="Cake Photo">
</body>
what is the purpose of writing alt attribute in the above code, if it is for readability then we can show the express intend on src part.
"The alt attribute specifies an alternate text for an image, if the
image cannot be displayed.
The alt attribute provides alternative information for an image if a
user for some reason cannot view it (because of slow connection, an
error in the src attribute, or if the user uses a screen reader).
Tip: To create a tooltip for an image, use the title attribute!"
http://www.w3schools.com/tags/att_img_alt.asp
The alt part loads if the picture is unable to load. So you can use the alt to provide information to the user about what should be there if it's not.
Related
What is meant by Images must have alternate text: Element has no title attribute
I had created img tag but developer tools gives me a warning but i can't understand what that means.
Affected resources
<img src="./img/twitter.png">
This has to do with screen readers. Screen readers have no way of translating an image into words that gets read to the user, even if the image only consists of text. As a result, it's necessary for images to have short, descriptive alt text so screen reader users clearly understand the image's contents and purpose.
There are 3 ways to give an image alternate text:
Using an alt attribute i.e. <img alt="drawing of a cat" src="...">
Using an aria-label i.e. <img aria-label="drawing of a cat" src="...">
Using an aria-labelledby attribute i.e. <img arialabelledby="someID" src="..."
The alt attribute is needed when the picture is not available or the user turned all pictures off in his/her browser. It's necessary to include this attribute to your img elements.
<img src=".." alt="Alternative text" width="200" height="100" aria-label="For screen readers" />
Use alternate txt for img tag like this : <img src="./img/twitter.png" alt="tweetImg"> .
As it is important, if there is slow connection the alternate txt will be visible or due to some error your image don't show up .
The HTMLImageElement property alt provides fallback (alternate) text to display when the image specified by the element is not loaded.
This may be the case because of an error, because the user has disabled the loading of images, or because the image hasn't finished loading yet.
See this to read more about alt
The image inside this anchor tag throws a "Linked image missing alternative text" error in the WAVE accessibility checker:
<img src="google.jpg" alt="" />
You can't have a decorative image being the sole element of a link. This image is a link, it's not decorative.
<img src="google.jpg" alt="" />
When an image is the only content inside the link, its alternative should contain the link destination description.
In other cases, adding the role="presentation" would have been sufficient to explicitely state that you willingly wanted a decorative image which is not the case here.
Support for the title attribute in screen readers and other assistive technologies is extremely limited; it is also useless for sighted keyboard users.
See for example,
Don't Rely on the Title Attribute for Accessibility (2016)
Using the HTML title attribute – updated (2013)
If a link contains only an image and no text, the content of the alt attribute constitutes link's "link text", i.e. this is what a screen reader will announce when the link receives focus. For this reason, the alt attribute cannot be empty in this case. You need something like the following:
<img src="google.jpg" alt="Google" />
If you include actual text next to the image, as in the following example, you can leave the alt attribute empty:
<img src="google.jpg" alt="" />Google
In the last example, the image can be treated as a decorative one, due to the presence of proper link text. If the string Google were included in the alt attribute, it would be announced twice by a screen reader.
Adding a title attribute to the link is not a great idea for the following reasons:
It is useless to sighted keyboard users who cannot hover the mouse pointer over the link.
Screen reader support for the title attribute is not entirely consistent, as can be seen from the test results A "click here" link with TITLE attribute: Screen reader compatibility (last updated in April 2019). Adding the attribute title="google link" to the above examples would just lead to needless repetition in those screen reader and browser combinations that actually support that attribute on links.
Lets say the alt text of an image is too long and the image is linked as in below
<a href="http://somelink.com" title="">
<img src="someimage.png" alt=""/>
<p class="hide_text">The complete alt text here as in too long to have any meaning to put in the title/alt above. Then is it accessible enough to put in the p tag?</p>
</a>
And I just hide the p text. Is that WCAG 2.0 AA accessible compliant then? If both title and alt is empty in such case and I include the image alt text in the p...is that WCAG 2.0 AA accessible?
If an image is the only element inside an anchor tag, its alt text would need to describe the link's destination rather than the image itself. If this description is too long, then it may be worth asking yourself whether this is appropriate.
This is a border-line WCAG pass/fail. The image could be said to fail 1.1.1 (non-text content) because it's not decorative but has no alt text. But the link itself would likely pass because the hidden text makes its destination programmatically determinable.
There's two reasons why I wouldn't use this approach:
Hidden text might not be available to access technology on all devices. I've seen this happen using VoiceOver on the iPhone.
Speech recognition users may have trouble clicking the link if seeing the image with no accompanying text doesn't give them enough info about how to instruct the recognition software to click the link.
So in conclusion I'd use alt text, try to pare it down to a short description of the link's destination, and ensure that it's obvious from the image content how to click it using speech recognition.
The best option in my case I have found is to use something like below
<a href="http://somelink.com" title="">
<img src="someimage.png" alt=" "/>
<p class="hide_text">The complete alt text here as in too long to have any meaning to put in the title/alt above. Then is it accessible enough to put in the p tag?</p>
</a>
Put a space in the alt . So that when NVDA reads it, it is read as Link graphic link "The complete alt text here as in too long to have any meaning to put in the title/alt above. Then is it accessible enough to put in the p tag?"
Seems to be ok. I am just not 100% certain if I am violating any WCAG rules.
It is not WCAG AA compliant because if you put a title attribute on a A tag, it can't be empty.
And I just hide the p text.
You can hide it as long as the screen-readers can read it (so no display: none)...
It might be WCAG AA compliant from many people's view, but you have to remember that not all people use a speech synthetizer and that such invisible information should be made available for everybody.
Also, link text should be as short as possible.
I am just learning HTML. I have a confusion on using image and alt in learning HTML. When I use alt it doesn't go to the alt image.
<img src="w3schools.jpg" alt="W3Schools.com" width="104" height="142">
When I try to use my own example, or image, it doesn't work.
The alt attribute specifies an alternate text for the image, if it cannot be displayed.
The alt attribute is required in HTML4 and the page will not be valid without it.
Checkout at this link an example: example.
<img src="http://www.1341234123412312/ic_mountain.jpg" alt="Image not found" style="width:200px;height:128px"/>
alt isn't a tag, it's an attribute. It doesn't specify an alternate image, it defines the alternate text of an image if it cannot be displayed. In most cases it's used as hover-over text.
Like henriquedsg89 mentioned the alt ATTRIBUTE is used to display alternate text. An example of it's purpose would be if a blind person can't see the photos. Instead the browser will read the alt attribute out loud.
alt is attribute, and used to display the image description. if image is not displayed because of some case.
<img src="/img.jpg" alt="Image not found">
I want to know what the difference is between alt="" and name=""
Would it be better to put the filename within the alt tag, or the description of the photo?
What makes better sense, both from SEO and validation stand-point?
Using the ALT attribute is more useful in terms of search engine optimalisation. Using the NAME attribute is mainly useful for internal page anchors.
The ALT attribute is intended to provide an alternate text that describes the image for people who use screen-readers, or search engines, for example.
The name attribute is mainly used for internal anchoring, which allows you to navigate within a page using anchors.
Example usage of the name attribute:
<!-- following ancor can be referenced as http://<your_url>#post-123 -->
<a name="post-123">permanent link to some post</a>
Example usage of alt attribute:
<!-- following image shows "FooBar Company Logo" when images can't be shown -->
<img src="logo.jpg" alt="FooBar Company logo" />
For more information regarding links in general: http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/struct/links.html
For more information about how and when to use the ALT attribute, see:
http://www.w3.org/QA/Tips/altAttribute.
The name attribute exists only to provide a name to refer to in JavaScript.
The alt attribute provides an alternate description for search engines, blind people, when the image could not be loaded, etc.
The title attribute provides a description which will be shown when the user hovers over the image with his mouse - some (but not all) browsers will use the alt attribute for this purpose when there is no title
I'd be a little wary of putting the file name in the ALT tag, since it would be displayed if images are turned off. Typically you set the ALT tag to server as a place holder with something like "Site Logo" or something else to indicate what the image is.
The NAME tag is used for anchoring and the like. If you wanted to create a link that scrolled a long page to your image, you would reference it through this.
Yeah, definitely put a description in the alt tag. It is really important for the visually impaired as this is what the screen readers will read when they come across an image. The only potential catch with this is that the alt tag is treated as tool tip text by some browsers, however, you can override that behavior with setting title="".
The alt attribute is intendet to supply an descriptive alternative in text form for the image. So if you have an image that shows a sunflower, you could use:
<img src="sunflower.jpg" alt="image of a sunflower on a sunny day">
The name attribute in intended to name the image for scripting so you can access it using images["sunflower"]. But nowadays you should use the id attribute instead.
You definitly want to use the ALT tag - for all the reasons mentioned above, and: this tag is mandatory according to W3C so you need it if you want to create "compliant code" (see e.g. w3schools).