The use of the alt attribute for images displayed within HTML is part of W3C's Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG).
If decorative images are rendered using HTML that do not add to the content and provide no additional information, then the W3C recommends that a blank alt attribute be included in the form of alt="".
[17] This makes the page more navigable for users of screen readers or non-graphical browsers by skipping over images that do not convey any meaning.
[18] This creates ambiguity since the user is generally unable to determine from a bare reading of a URL if the image is relevant to the text or if it is a purely decorative element of the webpage.
[22] During the lawsuit, the Australian commonwealth, state and territory governments issued a joint statement through the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy that they were adopting the W3C's accessibility guidelines for all .gov.au websites.
[23] In the United States, there have been several high-profile lawsuits involving the lack of alt attributes on images that cite a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
[25] National Federation of the Blind v. Target Corp. was a 2006 class-action lawsuit that alleged that Target.com violated the ADA because the images did not use alt attributes.