RE: https://mastodon.social/@AltTextHealthCheck/116318070750735303
I wonder what the stats would be from Twitter/Threads/other legacy social media are.
1
0
0
@WTL I have to wonder what the quality of the alt text would be tho.
When you checklist a quality metric, you just ensure the checkmark.
Compliance != Quality.
1
0
0
@mWare This is true. I guess the question then becomes is low-quality ALT text better than none?
1
0
0
@WTL and I think the argument would be no. Nevermind the bait & switch notion, having "I need to add alt text" or "sdljfhsdlfks" isn't helping anyone. To claim 100% of your images have that on 80% of them is just virtue signalling and making it all worse for everyone.
... except maybe the AI scrapers. They can DIAF, or infinite lorem ipsum.
See: https://poison.madhouse-project.org/useless-alt-text-explanation
1
0
0
this is heralded as a good example but only if you are checking boxes
- what if you don't know what a capybara is and you're completely blind? should have mentioned it's the largest in the rodent family so they don't have to waste time looking it up to understand what's in the photo
- you're not describing the subject in relation to the frame (in this case it's centered)
- yellow yuzu fruit? but yuzu is yellow. why not say "Brown capybara"? oh because they're brown... why not describe the color of the water?
- how do we know this is a hot spa? they also go in the water to cool off
- "and one is balanced on the top of the capybara's head" -- bad grammar, one what? we just have to infer that it's yuzu which is probably correct
you kind of have to write the alt-text differently depending on whether you're targeting a completely blind person, a person with vision impairment, or trying to make the image easily searched/indexed
2
1
1
