Hey @pablostanley thank you so much for sharing this! Iām looking into this feature to see what we can do as far as a product update to allow that capability. There may be an existing way to do this already, Iām checking with the team and will follow up asap thank you for helping to make Webflow sites more accessible
The disadvantage would be if there were semantic information in the image title. (Webflow adds id information to the file name, reducing that default utility.)
I think images that are part of the design can be background on divs and usually people do that. When the image is a part from the content you can use the image element / Images on background donāt have alt.
Maybe Iām wrong If yes tell me why so I can learn
Right. The question is if we should default to alt="" for those image elements, so that screen readers donāt read out ā5b2906cdb10d95c8453693d4_my-image.jpgā aloud. That is what they do with a default Webflow image element now.
I understand, but if you have an image that is part from the content you will probably add alt description. If the image is not part from the content you can use div with a background. Why adding an image that is part from the content and not adding alt description.
There isnāt a way to add an empty string now alt="", which is the correct thing to do withā¦
Weāre thinking about defaulting images to alt="", instead of leaving the attribute out when not set. I think this improves the default experience for site visitors with screen readers.
Iām wondering if there is any disadvantage that we havenāt considered with this default.
Iām trying to think of what the disadvantages of this could be, but nothing comes to mind.
Personally, I think this would be a good default. Itās up to designers to add description to their images but if they forget to do so, then people who use screen readers will suffer.