Technical communities · SINGAPORE
Singapore UX critiques: decide what a visual’s text alternative must explain
Use the reader’s task to distinguish essential visual information from decoration, and prepare a comparison that can be reviewed without the image.
By Boardzip · Published · Updated
Boardzip uses AI-assisted guide research, writing and review. Read how we research guides and check sources →
Start with these checks
- Accessibility or content critique that accepts diagrams and interface examples
- A session permitting a text-only comparison of the same task
- Feedback on information meaning rather than decorative description alone
The problem
A Singapore UX researcher writes a literal description for every image, but a diagram containing the information needed for a decision still has no usable text equivalent.
Start with the decision the visual supports
Write what the reader should understand or do after encountering the image. For a process diagram, that may be choosing the next step after a failed check; for a decorative banner there may be no task information at all. List the essential relationships and conditions. A description of colours and shapes can miss the decision entirely.
Separate appearance from information
SGDS v2 accessibility guidance distinguishes relevant text alternatives from unnecessary descriptions of decorative images. Use that distinction to review your example. If a visual encodes a sequence, comparison or exception, prepare equivalent information in an appropriate text form. Do not assume that one short sentence can replace a complex diagram merely because it occupies the alternative-text field.
- SGDS | Accessibility ↗ · Source checked
Compare the task with and without the visual
Show a peer the text version first and ask the question the original visual is meant to answer. Record missing relationships, ambiguous references or information available only by seeing the image. Then compare the visual version to locate the gap. This review can identify a defect; it does not substitute for feedback from the intended users or relevant assistive-technology testing.
Document the choice and its limits
Explain why the visual is decorative, informative or too complex for a short description, and where you placed the necessary explanation. Bring that reasoning to a content or accessibility session. Record the task and comparison used in your portfolio. The historical SGDS reference supports the distinction, while the effectiveness of your particular alternative still needs appropriate evaluation.
Questions and answers
Should every image receive a detailed description?
First identify its function. Unnecessary description can distract from surrounding information, while a meaningful diagram may need more than a brief label. Match the alternative to the task and the actual implementation rather than applying one length rule to every image.
Does my peer understanding the text prove it works for screen-reader users?
It shows that one reader could use the information in that comparison. It does not establish how the service behaves with a screen reader or what its intended users experience. State that boundary and plan the appropriate further feedback.
Sources and further reading
These references provide the guide’s source context and further reading. They do not confirm a current event, admission or an available place; check each listing’s organiser terms for those conditions.
- SGDS | Accessibility ↗Source checked
Each date belongs to the linked source check. These references provide source context; a recorded date does not by itself establish a completed independent review. Current event admission is checked separately in each listing. How to read the source dates →
Current listings to check
Topic matches from the verified Singapore feed. A matching topic does not confirm audience suitability, accessibility or available places; read the organiser’s terms.
No current verified listings match this guide’s search terms. Try a broader search or suggest an organiser we should check.
Browse the broader event category →Suggest a relevant organiser →