[thelist] In Defense of Fahrner Image Replacement

[Kristof Neirynck]

>> You provide a structure for the image (mind you, I would personally 
>> only use this technique for >headings or pullquotes) and then place 
>> the image within this semantically correct structure.
> 
> 
> For page headers, well, OK...I suppose, every once in a great while. But 
> what's wrong with
> 
> <img src="hello-world.gif' alt="Hello world">
> 
> Alt attribute will replace the image fine, no need for extra hacks.

Not quite.
<h1>Hello world</h1>
is different from
<h1><img src="hello-world.gif' alt="Hello world"></h1>
Alt text is less important to Google even if the image is inside an h1.

> If you want to use an image it won't be 'semantic', period. If you want 
> to be 'semantic', don't use an image.

Well <h1>Hello world</h1> is correct semantics isn't it?
I'm not using useless spans or anything.
I use real text inside real header tags , my css just makes it look like 
an image.
When you select the image, you still get the text.
Devices that don't understand css will just see text.
Screen readers will still read it...
You could use an alternative stylesheet as well.

It's evil, but not entirely evil.

> (All that 'semantics' stuff gets on my nerves, too, BTW. Anyone notices 
> how W3C has a propensity to take perfectly good, if somewhat 
> complicated, words, and twist their meaning beyond recognition?)

Um, no?
Force yourself to use lynx at least once in your lifetime.
This puts you on the same levvel as a blind man reading braile.
You'll love semantics.

BTW... Google loves semantics.


Kristof