[Typo3-dev] Core or extension? was: IMAGE.alttext RC2 possible bug

[Martin T. Kutschker]

Robert Lemke wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-04-05 at 18:19, Martin T. Kutschker wrote:
> 
>>>- It's not neccessary to change the core, if something should be changed
>>>for the creation of alt / title tags. That is important, because many
>>>sites won't update their core for one and a half year or so, until the
>>>next stable release comes out
>>
>>I don't see what might happen.
> 
> Okay, in this case it might be very unlikely. But what about the
> longdesc attribute, isn't that recommendet as well? I know, it's only
> detected by NS 6+ and only if you click your way through the properties
> of that paticular image, but maybe in a year or so that's required?
> 
> But it seems you're right.

Ah, the list for accessability becomes longer :-)

Seriously, I am interested in the subject and would like to improve 
Typo3 in this regard. Alas, my time is limited so I can't dedicate too 
much time on it. If nobody else setps up WAI compliance is post 3.6.


>>The site admin should be able to make any field required (and vice 
>>versa). This shouldn't be hardcoded in the extension (or the Core).
> 
> But it would be, because this is defined in the TCA. If you use an
> extension which creates two new fields in tt_content, it also provides
> the TCA configuration.

I know. See it as an RFE for Typo3: more flexible handling of TCA on a 
per site basis.

>>So you're argueing to do it as an extension with the option to ship it 
>>with the standard distro or as a "WAI-package".
>>
>>I'm not convinced because alt/title are so intrinsically linked to HTML, 
>>but a shy extension in the standard 3.6 distro would satisfy me. If this 
>>means anything to you ;-)
> 
> I think it's important to discuss these things. I mean, it's easy to
> create two new tt_content fields, but I know that there are many people
> who don't like a big tt_content and who possibly won't use title / alt
> attributes, although it's recommendet.

I would use the caption field as the title attribute.

And yes, I also dislike a huge tt_content, but the harm is already done 
with all those fancy image attributes. So let's bloat once more until we 
clean the whole table in 4.0 and use only flexforms for everything :-)

>>PS: But please remove strip_tags() :-)
> 
> 
> If I remember the RFC right, title and alt attributes are of the type
> CDATA which means no tags are allowed there anyways. So if you can give
> me an example of a situation when strip_tags would break something you
> need, I'll remove it.

I have brought up an example (image of an "<em>" tag, eg some HTML 
tuturial). Plus it's compeltely superfluos once the content goes through 
htmlspeacialchars - any < or > will be quoted anyway, so no harm may be 
done. I expect my users to know that alt/title are attributes and no 
container elements.

Mas