Not calling out, but on the "I put as much thought into alt text as I did into using the image" attitude... that's not really how it works! You are *describing an image,* and since Society's already agreed on a words-to-pictures conversion rate, using less than 1,000 words is already a compromise.
Like, REALLY bad. Like "The People Who Need Alt Text Think You're Actively Fucking With Them" bad. Y'all put a maximum of five words in that shit and expect it to carry an image? Come the fuck on with that. If I liked, but didn't share, an image you put alt text on, it's bc your alt text was bad.
Alt text is supposed to be more concise than an image description. "Alt text might tell a user there is a puddle on the floor, but an image description might go into further detail and say there is a puddle of orange juice on a white tiled kitchen floor."
www.perkins.org/resource/how...
The post I have linked here- which includes an image- has a good example of good alt text. When you make a post that includes alt text, the alt text should be whatever you'd say out loud to someone across the room to describe what it is in the image.
bsky.app/profile/borz...
I admit I use the alt text function extremely poorly or lackadaisically, with too much emphasis on making it humorous or entertaining to the abled, and I really should take alt text more seriously and try to actually provide people with real descriptive text...
It isn't out of any ill will or disrespect or apathy, maybe more my wish to entertain or be humorous taking too much priority over serving the purpose of alt text, and I really should take it more seriously and make an effort to do what I'm supposed to do, especially for someone of my convictions.
I do have a question tho: Is this good alt text or bad alt text? I have a tendency to reference esoteric nerd shit, and I often wonder if I'm giving everything people need to understand the image.
