W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 1998

Re: alt tags no with a twist

From: Colin F Reynolds <colin@nospam.demon.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1998 21:04:38 +0100
Message-ID: <xJM0+XCW5d21Ewqg@the-net-effect.com>
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
In article <Pine.GSO.4.02.9808181433250.16333-100000@shell.clark.net>,
David Poehlman <poehlman@clark.net> writes
>Below is a snippet of conversation I'm having with a webmaster concerning
>alt tags.  Is there away around the following problem while still using
>alt tags or any thoughts?

IMO the only way to deal with this is to pressure the browser developers
to remove the ALT-as-Tooltips functionality from their offerings. Check
the www-html thread "Questionable implementation of IMG ALT attribute as
tooltips" from the beginning of this year, in which Foteos Macrides
astutely spotted that

====
   what you want is:
        
   <IMG SRC="foo.blah" ALT="alternative_string" TITLE="tooltip_string">

   and broader implementation and understanding of this
   provision in HTML 4.0.
====

For more info, check out the rant I wrote about this, at:

 <URL:http://www.the-net-effect.com/bad-tooltips.html>

>"There are some images on the site which do not contain alt tags.  These
>are usually called either bd.gif or td.gif.  These are simple spacers used
>for page layout and should not have alt tags.  If they did, the page would
>pop up with little blank squares as your mouse moved over it on browsers
>like IE 4 or Navigator 4."

I agree with Kynn Bartlett that one should not use "spacer" images (HTML
is not a page-layout language).

-- 
Colin Reynolds, The Net Effect (World Wide) Ltd
http://www.the-net-effect.com/
Tel: +44 (0)1246 450 901
Fax: +44 (0)1246 450 902
Received on Tuesday, 18 August 1998 16:31:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:40 GMT