The jobs are being processed faster, now doing 120k jobs per day. There are 78k jobs remaining.
There were around 150k jobs for Jan 11th, it's almost through those. After that, there are only 4k jobs per day on average, meaning it will start processing a day every hour. I estimate it will start doing that around 1 or 2 pm CET today, so expect a lot of notifications start coming in after that. It should be all up-to-date around midnight (CET).
My plan is to do "clean-up, for moving" from 1 february, and then "close-up" on 1 mars, over on Facebook, with the clean-up part including introducing those who are willing to the federated part of online social interactions (and yes, I had notifications from a week back waiting for me here 😅).
Never before in history has anyone been able to be a she if he was born a he or the other way around we find ourselves, linguistically upon uncharted ground As to pronouns, you can choose whichever one you want to use but make up new ones, I'll refuse because they aren't there (if you want to use them among yourselves then I don't really care)
26/11/16 - Our cat, Mindy, was a stone-cold killer. We would regularly get up to find parts of rodents or skinks in the bathroom. Just like in this picture. Mindy's old now, and stays out of the way in the shed, away from the dogs, who get on her tits.
25/11/16 - A picture of Lily, pillow in hand, leaving for Schoolies. For those not familiar with this Australian cultural milestone, Schoolies is when the 18 year olds who are about to leave school, go to a (usually) seaside town and wreak havoc, get pregnant, take drugs, drink until they are sick etc.
As someone who is totally blind, the Fediverse is the only place where I have ever been able to follow people such as photographers, artists, or even those who post pictures of their cats or the food they ate. The reason is that most of them use alt text. They take the time to describe the images that my screen reader can't recognise. Some write the descriptions themselves, and others use tools such as altbot. Some worry that their descriptions aren't good enough, especially when they are new at this. Let me assure you, not only are they good enough, they are extremely appreciated! If the rest of the world thought as you did, it would be a much better place. Don't hesitate to ask if you're unsure of something, but never think that we don't notice your effort.
I once had to convert MBA lecturers' slides into tactile ones and describe in braille. This was Cambridge Uni so intelligent lecturers you would have thought but finally one said - I guess a picture soes paint a thousand words. My colleague then put up one slide from a lecturer and none of the others could work out what it said as it has some many graphs superimposed on each other. My sheer coincidence I was working on a bible (why it have never been done no idea) when some travelling missionaries knocked on the door. I had just got to the bit in Samuel 2 where God's chosen, King David, sent a man off to certain death in a battle so he could marry the man's wife. They went away
I really appreciate your post Georgina.Before I came here I had no idea of alt txt but now make sure it is always on my photos. I also try to spread the word outside Fediverse.
@MelSedds I didn't know what the Alt was for until an account (or maybe a bot) boosting cat pictures told me I should provide it. I've done so ever since (and edited the ones I posted before that) and besides the obvious benefit, I find creating the descriptions and sometimes giving more context great fun ☺️ (I even learned some new words when I wanted to give accurate descriptions, like calyx.)
something I’m never sure about is how much text in alt-text is too much. I generally stay as coincise as possible by describing what’s actually interesting in the image for the conversation, which may include written texts or not. Do you think vision-impaired readers may prefer a more complete description?
@lydiaschoch I find that I will put extra information in the alt text. Joke that's not in the post itself, perhaps. Pointing out what's strange in the picture. Explaining the joke. Something like it's a SPOILER tag you're only going to get if you check the alt text.
@xinit ☕ @Fedo ¶ @Lydia Schoch Wow! What a wonderful idea! Please forgive my ignorance, but is alt text something that sighted readers can see, or is it only available to screen readers? If so, this is one of the few times in which we actually get to have something that the rest of the world doesn't. If not, it's a great way to encourage sighted people to pay attention to the importance of alt text.
all the client applications i see allow anyone to see alt texts, there's a little "alt" button in the corner of the images. i think that does helps a lot for people to remember to put alt texts
@zy Some Mastodon sites offer to translate a post into the reader's language, which also translates the ALT text. As someone who likes to read posts in languages I'm not fluent with, it helps a lot to understand the pictures as well (e.g. memes or comic strips).
@zy You can also follow an alt text not that will remind you when you forget to add alt text. It just sends you a message requesting that you add alt text
on desktop web browsers, there's a tag in the corner of an image - either ALT or just a scary red exclamation mark (indicating that there's no ALT text).
If a user drags the mouse pointer over the image, the alt text is visible to sighted users. I think most mobile apps show it on a click, but I don't really remember.
The IMG ALT tag (more correctly, the ALT attribute of the IMG tag) has been a part of the HTML standard since the mid 1990s. I'm sighted. I haven't tested with a screen reader, but when looking at a Fedi post from a Web browser, the alt text is in the IMG ALT tag. Mouse over, and it just displays the alt text. Most other social networking platforms seem to put the alt text behind a "click the small ALT button and a popup will pop up" mechanism.
I'm sighted and I often look at the alt text on Fediverse graphics!
It's great for things like "here's a person I don't recognise, are they famous, is it a clip from a show and what's the show and why is it relevant here". There are cultural references which would just whoosh over my head without the description.
Or sometimes there'll be one like "photo of woodland, with a squirrel" and I'll be like "oh yeah! there _is_ a squirrel in the corner there" 😀
thank you for your kind words and especially thank you for making me discover altbot! It will make it easier to write alt text (but I will try to personalise it as much as I can anyway) 😀
Filling out alt text can be fun too because you can put your own snarky spin on things, so the benefit is mutual. You and other people who need it are so welcome here!
I was always wondering "Am I trying to explain with too much detail? Is it too little? Does anyone actually ever use alt text of my images?" This post gave me all the answers I needed! Thanks! All hail fediverse 😀
@Lironah @HeliaXyana I sometimes write in what I was feeling when taking the photograph, like one time I took a picture of clouds, and I said something like they looked great when I looked up in the sky and saw them, but the picture is crappy.... I find it fun to add such silly details in the alt text.
@dilmandila @Lironah Yes, good point. There is space for a little fun in there. When the subjective is the point of sharing the image, I think that's precisely what you should do.
@HeliaXyana I often use alt text to better understand an image, so I think it would be helpful. What should the viewer take away from seeing the image? If you were describing it to someone over the phone, what would you draw their attention to? Mood and meaning are definitely part of that.
@Hareguizer Well, there in lies the difficulty. I dislike instructing others in how they should see my work. Like in a gallery or museum, I like to keep the accompanying text relatively objective, as I feel all interpretations are valid. But that's not very helpful for those who cannot see it.
@HeliaXyana yes, and I can see it could be easy to go too far. Still, a reader can choose to stop reading at any point. I have never been troubled by too much alt text. There are whole essays on writing ‘good alt text’ but I think the important thing is to have alt text.
@Hareguizer Yes, I might be overthinking this a tad. Still, it's good to differentiate between intensions for descriptions. I've seen a museum boast about accessibility when the images only had a description from the artists, clearly intended for those able to view the work.
@Lydia Vvinters @Kris Herbert I can understand why you're thinking about it in this manner. Certainly, there is a case to be made both ways. If it's strictly meant for information, then short and to the point is good. But if it's about art, photography, etc. then it might make sense to describe it in more detail. But not all of us have seen in the past. So using metaphors, for example, sound pretty but may not truly help us understand what is in the image. It would be like saying "a woman with a face that looks like my mother's is sitting in a chair, holding a book." If you know what my mother looks like, it's fine. But if you don't, it will have no meaning for you. Likewise, I could say "the chair is beautiful" or I can say "the chair has ornate carvings of flowers on the back and has a velvet cushion". The latter tells me a lot more.
Yes, that's the problem. I see it as something that should match the intension but in the case of art, that can also be subjective. So in this case, if it's a work of art, I would be tempted to describe why this chair is beautiful to me.
Something like, "The soft lighting on the chair and the delicate carving evoke a sense of nostalgia in me."
@ClintonAnderson I have read that Title Case / Camel Case in hashtags is considered more accessible and therefore the standard. Of course, hashtags here are not case sensitive, so you are not limiting your audience with differing capitalization schemes.
@nunesdennis My technique is to imagine that I'm sitting in a movie theater next to someone who can't see the screen, and I have to whisper what I see to them so that they can be part of the experience. Of course, I don't pretend that my ALT descriptions are perfect or accurate, but they are an extension of my own expression, with my own flaws, mistakes, and way of describing things. And well, I'm a human, not a machine, so I guess that's part of the homemade charm. 😺
@davidrevoy @nunesdennis also, at minimum, consider that the default is something like "image." So even the difference between "photo" and "screenshot" and "meme" at least provides handles on what they're missing.
Obviously enough detail to be included in the conversation is better & elaboration on what's notable or aesthetic is best. Someone could always ask a question if they were curious, but not if they have insufficient info.
I usually elaborate on why it's nice: see attached
Oh, one other alt-text rule I follow. Sometimes an image contains no additional information at all. When this is the case, I actually say so, as briefly as possible. If the post already describes the image fully, I just caption "As described". If multiple photos contain the same thing, I just say "ibid." (or maybe "a burning dumpster", "same dumpster from another angle", "ibid.", "ibid."). If I *say* there's no useful information, a screen reader user won't have to *wonder* why it's blank.
@davidrevoy @nunesdennis I suggest turning on audio description for a movie that has it available. You’ll usually find a variety of styles and not all are as elaborate as you might imagine. The most important thing is making an effort and understanding your purpose for sharing the image can guide your effort.
How well do very general descriptions of popular media references tend to work for members of your community? For example:
Scene from The Empire Strikes Back, Lando Calrissian muttering to himself "This deal's getting worse all the time..."
I'd hope major hits like Star Wars have been made as accessible as possible over the years, but still worry such minimal scene-setting might perpetuate a "you had to be there" feeling of exclusion.
Manche machen sich Sorgen, dass ihre Beschreibungen nicht gut genug sind, vor allem, wenn sie neu auf diesem Gebiet sind. Ich kann Ihnen versichern, dass sie nicht nur gut genug sind, sondern auch sehr geschätzt werden! Wenn der Rest der Welt so denken würde wie Sie, wäre es ein viel besserer Ort. Zögern Sie nicht zu fragen, wenn Sie sich bei etwas unsicher sind, aber denken Sie nicht, dass wir Ihre Bemühungen nicht bemerken.
Einige schreiben die Beschreibungen selbst, andere verwenden Tools wie altbot. Manche machen sich Sorgen, dass ihre Beschreibungen nicht gut genug sind, vor allem, wenn sie neu auf diesem Gebiet sind. Ich kann Ihnen versichern, dass sie nicht nur gut genug sind, sondern auch sehr geschätzt werden! Wenn der Rest der Welt so denken würde wie Sie, wäre es ein viel besserer Ort. …
I admit that sometimes I struggle with alt tags. Understanding what there is to see in a picture is one thing, but providing info within the context of the overall post seems like it can come in handy
Curious to know if you tried Bluesky. I ask bc I thought Bluesky has a way to caption images.
I have an old art school friend who went gradually blind, and think of how I would describe my photos to her when I write my alt-text. I remember when she was sighted how much she enjoyed the act of looking, really catching this or that detail I hadn’t noticed, and I try to satisfy that, however I can, in text.
The Fediverse is also one of the few networks that actually allows you to edit the alt text directly. The only other ones I can think of are WordPress and Pinterest.
For the people who worry that their alt text isn't good enough - just keep practicing.
And consider how long it takes to read the ALT text. Was this a throw-away decorative image? Something brief should be fine. Was this image the thing you wanted to share? Time to be more descriptive.
Thank you so much for posting this! I always include alt-text, but started doing so consistently mostly because self-appointed alt-text cops kept needling me anytime I left it out. This is the first time an alt-text user has actually said something nice about it (that I've seen in my feed, anyway).
Very kind of you to take a moment and say you appreciate it. I will continue to include it.
@SamanthaJaneSmith In so many different kinds of art - it depends! I would describe what strikes me. So, "Portrait of a person standing next to a window but entirely made up of straight brushstrokes no single one shorter than the length of the face." Or, "Bold black lines intersect across a white canvas with a single square of yellow towards the upper right corner."
@SamanthaJaneSmith Honestly, if you don't know how on something specific - reach out and ask. If I'm around I'm happy to give it a go, but there's also the hashtag ALT4Me which will summon a figurative army to help you out 😁
this is the first thing I read right after I went back in and edited my ALTtext for the second time because I didn't think it was detailed enough. Just need to keep trying. Thank you for posting this!
That's fantastic. Alt tags have been around since I started coding for the web 30 years ago and yet for some reason it's taken this generation of social media to integrate them fully. I'm so glad you can join us fully!
I always try to add Alt Text ... and I just discovered that on Pixelfed you can switch on a setting that forces you to add Alt Text. Great idea so I've turned it on on my Pixelfed account.
@Xanathon That would be truly wonderful! But honestly, even just using AltBot normally is fine, since the descriptions usually appear as a post right after the original.
@ConnyDuck So what? She says it would be nice Alt text in the photo, but if this is difficult, then alt text in the form of a post from an altbot is enough. This proves my point about inconvenience. It would be convenient if the image was recognized and the text was inserted at the stage of writing the post! I have already raised this issue with the developer of Tusky. I love this app and hope the developer will implement this feature.
THANK YOU for this! I struggle to create alt text and it feels like it is a waste of time as nobody actually reads it. I will now keep your post and use it to motivate myself to create alt texts and enjoy knowing it matters rather than feel like it is pointless.
Is it enough to have the Altbot text as a comment to my post or would it be better for you and others if I transfer the Altbot description to the image alt text?
@Xanathon That would be truly wonderful! But honestly, even just using AltBot normally is fine, since the descriptions usually appear as a post right after the original.
Thanks for the information. So far I used ChatGPT manually for descriptions of my scifi and fantasy renders because Google's LLM was very lacking. I will keep that up, but for photographies or simpler images I will use Altbot. That was a very valuable hint, thanks again!
@Memere I am a seeing person, but I love alt text for the added info or insight into the personality of the poster and what's important to them. Sometimes they contain jokes.
As a sighted person who posts pics, I find I enjoy writing alt-text descriptions, so I don't mind it or think of it as a burden. I often find something new to appreciate in the picture as I think about how to describe it, and it feels nice to be doing something intentionally inclusive as well. I hope you don't think we're all begrudgingly doing something we hate, because some of us embrace it and are glad to do it.
@josh susser Oh, no. Definitely not, and that's really the point. It's wonderful to see people who care so deeply about inclusivity. Your own experience makes it even more meaningful, since both sides are benefiting. All of this is a lovely change from what I see elsewhere.
@joshsusser I haven't posted some images because it does take time and sometimes photos are difficult to explain, but I won't post images without it because it seems disrespectful on this platform without it and I don't boost images without it. So enjoying writing it or not, it's respecting a space that was here before the mass exoduses from other places.
I'm so glad it's helpful! It's such an important skill for us to practice, too. It is so heartening to see not just the accessibility itself, but the solidarity—many people won't share a post that lacks alt text. That helps keep it front & center as an expectation rather than a bonus.
@Nat Oleander It's just a pity that if you post about an obscure enough niche topic like I do, it's the more difficult to make image posts perfectly accessible to everyone, the more obscure the topic is. For the more obscure the topic is, the more you have to describe, and the more you have to explain. (Caution: Never put explanations into alt-text! They must go where everyone can access them.)
I currently write the longest image descriptions in the whole Fediverse by a wide margin. But they may not actually be accessible enough, even though I describe all my original images twice.
The short descriptions in the alt-text don't always contain text transcripts, especially not all of them, and being only short descriptions, they aren't full, detailed visual descriptions either. The long descriptions for the same images in the post regularly end up with a five-digit character count. They may not be accessible because they're way too long. But sometimes they're the only place wher
... show more
@Nat Oleander It's just a pity that if you post about an obscure enough niche topic like I do, it's the more difficult to make image posts perfectly accessible to everyone, the more obscure the topic is. For the more obscure the topic is, the more you have to describe, and the more you have to explain. (Caution: Never put explanations into alt-text! They must go where everyone can access them.)
I currently write the longest image descriptions in the whole Fediverse by a wide margin. But they may not actually be accessible enough, even though I describe all my original images twice.
The short descriptions in the alt-text don't always contain text transcripts, especially not all of them, and being only short descriptions, they aren't full, detailed visual descriptions either. The long descriptions for the same images in the post regularly end up with a five-digit character count. They may not be accessible because they're way too long. But sometimes they're the only place where all text transcripts can be found. And they are the only place where explanations can be found.
So the consequence should be that I quit posting my original images because they're impossible to make perfectly accessible to everyone, at least as long as there is no rock-solid definition for what's actually required in image descriptions in my obscure edge-case. But there isn't even any consensus on whether text that's illegible or that's so tiny that it's basically invisible must be transcribed if it can be sourced.
@Jupiter Rowland @Nat Oleander I'm a bit confused. If you write long descriptions, why wouldn't that help to make your images accessible? Alt text doesn't need to be perfect. It just needs to give us an idea of what is in the image. It's certainly wonderful when more details are given, but even having an idea of what is going on is better than nothing.
@Georgiana Brummell I'd say not everyone would consider almost 1,000 characters of image description in a 1,500-character alt-text accessible. And even fewer people would consider a long image description in the post itself that's tens of thousands of characters long accessible if your screen reader spends an hour or several rambling it down.
My most extreme case is a post with only one image. That one image is described twice like all my halfway recent original images. The short description in the alt-text is a bit over 1,400 characters long which barely leaves any room for the note that there is also a long description in the post itself. That long description is over 60,000 characters long. I'm not kidding. It took me two full days from getting up to going to bed to research for it and write it.
Now, there are a few dozen bits and pieces of text all over the image. At the resolution at which I've posted the image, two of them are ever so barely le
... show more
@Georgiana Brummell I'd say not everyone would consider almost 1,000 characters of image description in a 1,500-character alt-text accessible. And even fewer people would consider a long image description in the post itself that's tens of thousands of characters long accessible if your screen reader spends an hour or several rambling it down.
My most extreme case is a post with only one image. That one image is described twice like all my halfway recent original images. The short description in the alt-text is a bit over 1,400 characters long which barely leaves any room for the note that there is also a long description in the post itself. That long description is over 60,000 characters long. I'm not kidding. It took me two full days from getting up to going to bed to research for it and write it.
Now, there are a few dozen bits and pieces of text all over the image. At the resolution at which I've posted the image, two of them are ever so barely legible for sighted people. They're on a large logo on a building. Four more, two of them on that logo, too, two more on a sign on an easel, are illegible, but still visible. At least more on signs inside the building are visible, but they can't easily be identified as text. All the others are so tiny that they're invisible. It takes the long image description to even know where they are, for example, on the control panels of teleporters.
And yet, they are all within the borders of the image. And I can transcribe them. I can't read them in the image, but I can go to the place shown in the image and take closer looks.
Unfortunately, the rule or guideline that any and all text in an image must be transcribed verbatim does not take into consideration text that can't be read in the image, but that can be sourced and thus transcribed by whoever posts the image. No confirmation, no exception. And so I have to assume that I have to transcribe illegible text as well. And so I do transcribe them all.
But there's no way for me to put all these text transcripts into the alt-text, not if I want to keep Mastodon, Misskey and their forks from chopping it off at the 1,500-character mark. I'd also have to explain where all these pieces of text are, after all. And so the text transcripts are only available in the 60,000-character monster of a long image description.
It isn't really accessible to expect blind users to have their screen readers ramble and ramble and ramble for hours, just to get information that should actually belong into the alt-text which, in turn, shouldn't be longer than 200 characters.
On the other hand, it doesn't really seem accessible to me if I expect people to ask me to describe things in the image for them. It rather feels sloppy, if not out-right ableist to not describe everything that someone could possibly want to know right away.
The problem with my images is that they're renderings from very obscure 3-D virtual worlds. This means that nobody knows what anything in these images looks like unless they can see these images. This, in turn, means that I cannot expect anyone to know what something in my images looks like anyway. They don't.
At the same time, I can't expect everyone to not care about my images. In fact, I expect the very topic of 3-D virtual worlds that actually exist to make people curious. At this point, it doesn't matter what's important in my images within the context of the post. Sighted people will go explore the new and unknown world by taking closer looks at all the big and small details in the image.
But blind or visually-impaired people may be just as curious. They may want the same chance to explore this new world by experiencing what's in that one image. Denying them the same chances as sighted people is ableist. But giving them this chance requires an absolutely titanic image description.
Sure, I describe lots of details which a sighted person can't possibly recognise when looking at the image, especially not at the resolution of the image as I've posted it. But I simply can't keep telling blind or visually-impaired people that certain things in the image can't be recognised due to the image resolution. It feels lazy, like weaseling out. I mean, I can see all these details. Not in the image, but where the image was made, simply by walking closer to them or moving the camera closer to them.
If there are two dark objects inside a building that may or may not be plants, but that can't be identified as plants by looking at the image, why shouldn't I describe them as follows: "On the sides of the teleport panel, there are two identical açaí palms in square terracotta pots with wide rims. Like the other potted plants, these mostly dark green plants with long pointy leaves are kept at an indoor-compatible size, namely about three and a half metres or eleven and a half feet tall. Also, like the other potted plants, they are made of only four flat surfaces with partially transparent pictures of the plant on them, arranged in angles of 45 degrees to one another."
If there's room for improvement in my image descriptions, I improve my future image descriptions and declare my past image descriptions outdated. In fact, the 60,000-character-long description is outdated because it's bad style to describe dimension using measures. Instead, dimensions should be described by comparing them with something everyone is familiar with like body parts.
Right now, by the way, I'm upping my game at describing avatars, using rules and guidelines for describing people which I've discovered over the last few months. The last time I've described an avatar, I've done so in about 7,000 characters, but according to my new discoveries, I may have missed something.
However, I can't go into so much detail while still making my image descriptions short enough that a screen reader can read through them in under a minute.
@Jupiter Rowland @Nat Oleander Oh my goodness! Now I see what you mean. Even as a lover of nineteenth-century writing and proper English, that's long, especially for alt text!
What went into the actual alt-text of the image were 1,402 characters of visual description + 97 characters of notice that there's a long description in the post. The over 60,000 characters went into the post text body, right below the image itself.
I could have put the long description into the alt-text. But it would have been a nightmare for blind or visually-impaired people because screen readers can't navigate alt-text. Also, Mastodon, Glitch, Hometown, Misskey, Calckey, Firefish, Iceshrimp, CherryPick, Sharkey, Catodon and the other Mastodon and Misskey forks chop long alt-texts from outside off at the 1,500-character mark. Mastodon would simply have deleted almost 59,000 characters from my image description on their side, had I put it into the alt-text.
Thank you for the encourageing words. I am one of those people who always think that the descriptions are somehow not good enough and end up overthinking it...
Thank you for saying this. I had never written alt text before joining the fediverse, but I’ve come to appreciate the opportunity it gives me to think about why I posted the image and what’s worth knowing about it. I still do worry, but I feel more relaxed thanks to your post.
I often spend more time writing alt text than the text in the toot itself - not just to keep the toot itself as short as possible.
Writing alt text, even if using energy, is useful for myself as well. In particular in the case of photo's, it makes me look better. Often I notice details that I missed before.
What I like about Mastodon is the enormous variety in people, from all over the world, one can meet here and discuss with. Even if I'm not an "easy person", it enriches my life.
I often spend more time writing alt text than the text in the toot itself - not just to keep the toot itself as short as possible.
I always spend more time describing my images than writing the post that they go into.
For my meme posts, that's because I have to explain the picture and find the appropriate links to external explanations (KnowYourMeme etc.) to shorten my explanation block if possible.
For my original images, it's because I have to describe them twice. There's always an alt-text which, as of late, fills the 1,500-character limit imposed by Mastodon, Misskey etc. to the brim. But that alt-text is only a shortened and slightly adapted version of an extremely long long description which goes into the post text body and which also includes transcripts of any and all text in the image, readable or not, as well as all explanations which I deem necessary for outsiders to understand the image.
I often spend more time writing alt text than the text in the toot itself - not just to keep the toot itself as short as possible.
I always spend more time describing my images than writing the post that they go into.
For my meme posts, that's because I have to explain the picture and find the appropriate links to external explanations (KnowYourMeme etc.) to shorten my explanation block if possible.
For my original images, it's because I have to describe them twice. There's always an alt-text which, as of late, fills the 1,500-character limit imposed by Mastodon, Misskey etc. to the brim. But that alt-text is only a shortened and slightly adapted version of an extremely long long description which goes into the post text body and which also includes transcripts of any and all text in the image, readable or not, as well as all explanations which I deem necessary for outsiders to understand the image. Since the images are about an extremely obscure niche topic, this means I have to explain a lot.
A while ago, I spent two full days, morning to evening, researching for and describing and explaining one single image. The result was probably the longest image description ever posted in the Fediverse. And I actually had to limit myself, otherwise the description would have been even vastly longer and taken over a month to complete. Good thing I don't have any character limit to worry about. The only exception is that Mastodon may reject posts from outside with over 100,000 characters.
@modulux Also, thanks for the simple fact, that every Fediverse server has a publicly full-featured API, so it is possible to write a client which you want to use, and you do not have to use what some corporation gives you, on platforms of its choosing. Also, thank you again for the image descriptions, they're really appreciated.
Thanks for this post. I’m a person who always try to add descriptions, reallly wonder if I am doing it right, and have always wondered if anyone ever looked at them.
A while back, I built an exhibit I thought people would find interesting.
The first place I took it, I was thanked for having an exhibit which was accessible for the visually-impaired (I'm not certain about totally blind). I hadn't even thought of it that way!
You can read my write-up here. Unfortunately, the "caption" property on the images kind of conflicts with the "alt text" property, and I don't know which one you'll get.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who finds themselves paying more attention to their alt text than the actual post or image, both because it just seems right but also because it's kind of fun to put a little lighthearted humor. If a picture is a thousand words then the inverse must also be true.
I'm so glad to hear this! I put alt text on my photos and I try to get the important bits without overthinking it. I say what a thing is, list the colors it's in if that's important, explain the composition if that's important - all those old photo classes discussing images help with doing this, I've found.
If there’s no #Alt4Me tag on the undescribed image, it’s still worth being polite as no one wants bad feelings generated around the topic of descriptions. You might want to just reply with a description and #Alt4You tag, and if they’re abled they will hopefully get the message that descriptions are preferred.
I struggle with mine, that are not photos. The asemic art collage compositions I create can be very chaotic. Asemic writing & deconstructed text removes meaning, leaving the codes and conventions of writing and text. A combination of various colours, textures, irregular shapes and lines is an accurate over all description, but the devilishness is in the details. Sometimes I succeed, sometimes I fail. I've tried using the Alt-for-me tag, but nobody responded.
If you don't mind my asking - as a comic artist, I usually post full comic pages. There isn't enough alt text room to fully transcribe the page, so usually l will write something like "Page X of the comic Love and Hex. Full transcript: (link to an external page with both the comic image and a complete transcript)" followed by a broader description of what's going on without much detail.
Does that sort of thing suffice, or is there a preferred approach?
Are there things your screen reader has trouble with or that make listening more tedious?
I remember from years ago there was a sequence preference for some things. For example, with lists, I think the preference was word first, then tick box or radio button.
Yes. That still exists and is all part of WCAG, the guidelines used to create accessible websites, documents, etc. I am still learning it, so I can't answer from a professional point of view. But from a personal one, I find emoticons, emojis, etc. to be annoying, especially when they're used consecutively. "hands clapping" twenty times, for example, or during e-mails or other important communication. I don't mind if someone includes a few in his posts. Websites with clutter, such as adds in the middle of articles, hamburger menus, strange edit boxes, and pages that try to refresh when I read them are annoying, and of course, captchas without any audio option can be not only frustrating but actual barriers. I also convert all pdfs to txt. But as far as alt text, not much causes trouble. Sometimes, having many tags in the beginning or middle of a post, instead of at the end, can be confusing, since I have no way of just scrolling passed them.
I often get tasked to write alt-text descriptions for the images accompanying SEO blogs. I've read a couple of guides with recommendations for what's most "salient" in alt-text (some of them said, "Don't lead with 'image of' & I thought "'oh ... DUH'"), but is there anything particular that you find especially helpful? Like identifying overhead view or differentiating between foreground vs. background?? Is it context-dependent?
Don't hesitate to ask if you're unsure of something, but never think that we don't notice your effort.
I do have a few questions, specifically because my image posts have gone unnoticed by blind or visually-impaired users so far.
Judging and assuming from the information I've gathered so far, my original images require very extensive and detailed descriptions. A full description is too long for alt-text, so what I do is write a full description with all text transcripts and all necessary explanations, put it into the post text body and then condense a shorter, but still long alt-text from it. What's your stance on this method of describing the same image twice over?
Also, where would you personally prefer a long description? In the post itself? Or in an external document that's linked into the post? If you're on a phone app, remember that the external document will inevitably open your Web browser.
Do you prefer images described, based on what a sighted person can see in the image as it is posted? Or do you prefer a description that is
... show more
Don't hesitate to ask if you're unsure of something, but never think that we don't notice your effort.
I do have a few questions, specifically because my image posts have gone unnoticed by blind or visually-impaired users so far.
Judging and assuming from the information I've gathered so far, my original images require very extensive and detailed descriptions. A full description is too long for alt-text, so what I do is write a full description with all text transcripts and all necessary explanations, put it into the post text body and then condense a shorter, but still long alt-text from it. What's your stance on this method of describing the same image twice over?
Also, where would you personally prefer a long description? In the post itself? Or in an external document that's linked into the post? If you're on a phone app, remember that the external document will inevitably open your Web browser.
Do you prefer images described, based on what a sighted person can see in the image as it is posted? Or do you prefer a description that is not limited by the restriction of the image itself, for example, assuming an infinite image resolution and an infinite zoom factor that would let sighted people theoretically see even tiniest details?
If I mention something in my image description of which you don't know what it looks like, do you need a detailed visual description?
Concerning text transcripts: Let's assume a bit of text in an image is too small to be legible for sighted people, but I can read it at the original source, so I can transcribe it nonetheless. Shall I transcribe it? What about if said text is too small to be recognisable as text or so tiny that's it's practically invisible? I mean, after all, the concept of image resolution should not matter to totally blind people, so writing that a piece of text can't be read because the resolution of the image is too low ought to sound like a lame excuse for skimping a transcript.
If there's a building in one of my images, I can safely assume that you don't know what that one specific building looks like, so I guess I can also assume that you need it described. If I could, I would do so using architectural terms and then explaining all these architectural terms right after using them. Would you say that's the correct way? Because that's why I avoid having realistic buildings in my images.
If there's an image in my image, do you need it described? At a level that I can source right where the image is without moving away too far, or at a level that I can only source by moving farther away to the place shown in the image? What about an image in an image in my image? (I'm serious. I've actually described images within images within my image, but I've stopped when this was about to go out of hand due to there being too many to describe.)
I'm currently working on a series of posts with images showing a virtual-world avatar in various but similar outfits; in fact, I have been since last year. I may have questions later regarding at what level of detail I have to describe that avatar.
And - everyone sighted, please, let us worry a bit about our descriptions. It's a good thing to worry about. That is, many of our worries are about things that are completely out of our hands. Alt texts are something we can act on. We can think about what we see in a picture, what's important to us, what we want to convey, what we should describe. We can talk about it with each other, try things out, and get better at it.
I've shared this post of you because more people need to know that Alt Text and Image Descriptions are not only good but are appreciated by those that rely on them!
The strenght of the Fediverse is based upon it's diversity, and that must include accessibility!
After all it's easy for sighted people to dismiss it when in reality it doesn't take away anything from them if they just write a sentence or two per image.
I hate it when I can't edit the alt text exactly for this same reason! Every social network shoud let everyone do it! I forget from time to time because I'm always rushing to get the post done and be gone x'D and it's enfuriating
I do my best with this. It's extra writing, and I love the sound of my own voice even in text, so I actually find it fun and not a chore.
Still, Fedi really taught me how important it is and how to do it well, and I'm thankful for that. I've been on the periphery of web dev since before it was called "web dev" so I knew what alt text was. But I'll confess to never doing it particularly well before I came here.
You know what? This is a nice post. I never thought much about this. #Fedilab gives me a big yellow warning when there's no #alttext so I just fill it in. But as someone who's only worry is overstimulation it rarely really crosses my mind. This is a good reminder that it dóés matter, and reading it makes me happy I fill it in.
BlueSky has an option in the settings that forces you to add alt-text before posting an image or video. If people still aren't adding alt text, that is definitely a choice they are making, and it's not a good choice IMHO.
I appreciate you saying this. Is there a list of alttext generators that most people here use? I am trying to use them as much as possible. I will definitely look up altbot.
This is wonderful! Please may I ask - I was just adding some alt text to an image and wondered if there's a convention when the text on the post adequately describes the image or I struggle to describe it again without repetition, is alt text still needed/is it annoying listening to it again, or do you always prefer alt text? Thanks!
@James 🦉 #FBPE 🇪🇺 No. if you describe it, then the alt text really shouldn't be needed. The whole purpose of the alt text is to describe the image, so if that's what you're doing, you don't need to do it twice. However, there may be an exception. Let's say that you have a picture, and "grandma's delicious cake" is written on the picture. Since it's inside the image, a screen reader most likely wouldn't be able to read that without some other extraction/ocr tool. So in that case, you could write the text. Whether you choose to add details "the cake is in a pan, sitting on a large table", is up to you.
@James 🦉 #FBPE 🇪🇺 I actually just saw something very interesting, directly related to our conversation! Someone posted an image with two descriptions. It seemed that he wrote one and then something like Altbot wrote the other. It was fascinating, because while they were describing the same thing, the second was more detailed. Yet either one could have worked and provided the same information. That said, here, the focus was on the image. It wasn't just there in the background with text, so while the double description wasn't technically necessary, it worked.
I'm curious about your browsing setup, do you mind if I ask about it? (I've gone back and added alt text to any images I've posted to try and be worthy)
@Gary Brazzell The only other social platforms I've used are Facebook and Dreamwidth. On Facebook, I've never seen alt tags at all. Dreamwidth is a journalling site, so it's really a different thing entirely. I do love the alt text here, though. I was very surprised when I first saw it, and even more so at how many people use them and even refuse to boost images without them! So it was an extremely wonderful thing to realise. As for accessibility, the Basic Mobile site (not app) of Facebook used to be very accessible. Their shutting it down is what made me come to Friendica. I mostly use it via a client called TweeseCake. I am finding various inaccessible features, or at least ones that cause a lot of a nnoyance, on the main site and intend to write to the Friendica Support group about it. Mastodon seems to be accessible from my glancing at it while reading people's profiles.
This is uplifting. May there be a riddle to honor people with visual impairments who found themselves welcome within the Federation. “Whom does not see, yet has thousands of eyes writing for them?”
@zy @shred @dandylover1 When I get a message in German, the alt text is also in German (for example). It makes it easy to copy and paste into an internet translator.
I have found it helpful when the words are embedded in the picture too. Just go to the alt text and cut and paste.
I'm so happy that it helps people with vision problems.
(I had no idea German would be so important in 2025, but here we are.)
I previously used alt tests only on my Mastodon posts (I post images here only very occasionally), but this kind of comments really convinced me that I should just bite the bullet and write alt texts for Pixelfed images from now on, too. Because that's what I *ought* to be doing.
After several hours, I have managed to go through every contact's profile, unfollow all of the political ones and ones that didn't really post content that interested me, , and ensure that the ones I really like are set to show all posts. Now, my feeds look wonderful and are much quieter!
Hi everyone, I'm Faustus (not really, but you know how it goes). I finally deactivated FB and am exploring federated alternatives.
At this point, I'm looking for cool, funny, and smart people to connect with. And while I agree that there's a lot going on to be angry about, I find constant shouting into the void to be wearisome. We can be friends if you think the world is full of nuance and disagree with someone thoughtfully.
Testen van het plannen van een bericht. Is natuurlijk wel belangrijk om te zorgen dat je tijdsinstelling op juiste tijdzone staat. Die van mij is Europe/Amsterdam.
Dit bericht zou maandag 13 januari om 9 uur moeten verschijnen.
I am interested in finding sites that are similar to Reddit and Lemmy, either directly or just as forums where profiles can be created, groups can be joined, and/or different topics can be discussed. They must allow for editing and deleting of content and a wide variety of topics. I don't care if they're federated or not, though my guess is, if they're not, it would be easier to delete things. That said, I know Friendica does respect people's wishes, which is is one of the reasons for my joining them. I also don't care if they use the upvote system or not. Ideally, it would also have the ability to create private groups or topics. People have recommended Speakbits, headcycle, Blue Dwarf, and Chatter Box (the last isn't available yet). Most of these seem to have very small memberships, though Headcycle might be larger. If anyone is there, please let me know. I am totally blind and use NVDA. For Reddit, I use Luna, since it is very accessible, and the old.reddit site. I use TweeseCake for Friendica, so if it works with one or more of these new sites, that would be an extra bonus. I
... show more
I am interested in finding sites that are similar to Reddit and Lemmy, either directly or just as forums where profiles can be created, groups can be joined, and/or different topics can be discussed. They must allow for editing and deleting of content and a wide variety of topics. I don't care if they're federated or not, though my guess is, if they're not, it would be easier to delete things. That said, I know Friendica does respect people's wishes, which is is one of the reasons for my joining them. I also don't care if they use the upvote system or not. Ideally, it would also have the ability to create private groups or topics. People have recommended Speakbits, headcycle, Blue Dwarf, and Chatter Box (the last isn't available yet). Most of these seem to have very small memberships, though Headcycle might be larger. If anyone is there, please let me know. I am totally blind and use NVDA. For Reddit, I use Luna, since it is very accessible, and the old.reddit site. I use TweeseCake for Friendica, so if it works with one or more of these new sites, that would be an extra bonus. I would like a simple layout on the websites themselves if possible.
Zwaar onder de indruk van de ritmische complexiteit van dit stuk!
Tyn Wybenga componeerde deze vette mix van jazz en Dilla-ritmes door zijn orkest eerst te laten improviseren, daar samples van te maken, die zwaar te bewerken, daar een compositie van te maken, en daarna zijn orkest die samples weer na te laten spelen.
Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.
🇳🇱 Het is tijd om te kijken of de Fediverse al geschikt is voor een blogger als plek om vragen te beantwoorden en kennis te delen over reizen naar Nieuw-Zeeland.
Reisblog 123NZ is al jarenlang de plek waar alle info over reizen naar en werken in Nieuw-Zeeland gedeeld worden. Dat zal niet veranderen.
Maar alle vragen die eerst beantwoord werden in allerlei groepen op een oud en massaal social media platform kunnen nu hier gesteld worden. Vraag maar raak.
Maar nu eerst gewend raken aan Friendica en wat tweaken.
🇳🇱 Het is tijd om te kijken of de Fediverse al geschikt is voor een blogger als plek om vragen te beantwoorden en kennis te delen over reizen naar Nieuw-Zeeland.
Reisblog 123NZ is al jarenlang de plek waar alle info over reizen naar en werken in Nieuw-Zeeland gedeeld worden. Dat zal niet veranderen.
Maar alle vragen die eerst beantwoord werden in allerlei groepen op een oud en massaal social media platform kunnen nu hier gesteld worden. Vraag maar raak.
Maar nu eerst gewend raken aan Friendica en wat tweaken.
I am seeing so many people on here who are migrating from other social media platforms because of recent stuff and things, and I think it is so interesting (meaning cool) we are all doing it simultaneously. I love how we are learning this stuff together at the same time. If that makes any sense.
Ironically, these comics were indeed made via Dalle, but I (or another ambitious artist) may create them out of real art one day. The sequel comic is quite messy and really deserves a remake. I'm not sure why Fatima and some abrahamic prophets are wearing glasses when I don't know if they were invented yet during their lives.
People mention MeWe a lot these days, and I tried it a few years ago. The interface was good but it attracted a lot of alt-right users when Twitter and FB actually moderated posts. I didn't stick around long, so I can't speak for the vibe now.
Rather than posting code or file attachments on Friendica, I set up a GitLab repository for the "Bookface" theme project. All my future updates will be here:
I think what I need to do is figure out how to separate this from #mastodon as I don't need to read the same posts twice. I really want to reach out and interact with people who are on #friendica vs crossposting. Anyone with any insights on how to maximize this experience and make it different would be appreciated.
@John Dziak I have found a button that lets you see “local” accounts, which would be Friendica. That has helped a bunch. I have started interacting more with those vs the ones that are purely cross posting from other platforms.
I think getting a separate mastodon account is the answer. You're using the friendica account here as well, and the whole thing is federated / talks to each other.
A novelty one today. Yamaha Sessions 3 from 1981. A promo record released by Yamaha Stuidos Japan to demonstrate the Yamaha GS-1 synthesizer. Featuring keyboardist Keiko Doi from the all female synthesizer trio Cosmos, some funky bass lines, cool drum breaks, pretty amazing 80s session photos on the cover, and adorable liner notes its a fun bargin bin pick up.
Max Riethmuller
in reply to Ruud • •Ruud
in reply to Max Riethmuller • •Ruud
in reply to Ruud • •phle
in reply to Ruud • •Good good!
My plan is to do "clean-up, for moving" from 1 february, and then "close-up" on 1 mars, over on Facebook,
with the clean-up part including introducing those who are willing to the federated part of online social interactions
(and yes, I had notifications from a week back waiting for me here 😅).
Ruud likes this.