W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > html-tidy@w3.org > October to December 1999

Re: Tidy Request

From: Claus Färber <list-w3c-html-tidy@faerber.muc.de>
Date: 01 Oct 1999 00:00:00 +0000
To: html-tidy@w3.org
Message-ID: <7Q3LU$U3cDB@faerber.muc.de>
Michael Nahrath <subotnik@gmx.de> schrieb/wrote:
> alt=""  _is_ the correct alternate-text for an img that is only
> presentational.

And how is tidy supposed to know that it is? In most cases, the author  
just did not care about alt text.

> If the Image is a spacer  alt=" "  may be more adequate, if
> it is a dot maybe  alt="*"  is better.

No, in this case it would be <li> instead of <img ...>.

> It _is_ important to make meaningless images unseen in a text-only browser,
> otherwise it would show an  [image] or [spacer.gif] for each spacer.
>
> And: <img ...> without alt is not valid html 4.0.

Well, tidy can't correct all errors; especially errors where mandatory  
information is missing.

-- 
Claus Andre Faerber <http://www.faerber.muc.de>
PGP: ID=1024/527CADCD FP=12 20 49 F3 E1 04 9E 9E  25 56 69 A5 C6 A0 C9 DC
Received on Friday, 1 October 1999 10:55:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 April 2012 06:13:42 GMT