W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2002

Re: Empty alt tags

From: Ineke van der Maat <inekemaa@xs4all.nl>
Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2002 02:34:24 +0100
Message-ID: <007401c1bc0a$3a792fc0$a6a66dc2@ineke>
To: "Simon White" <simon.white@jkd.co.uk>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>

Hallo Simon and Chas,

Thank you for your  friendly offer, but the terms are very clearly explained in the books I have.. :

"A tag can also possess one or more attributes, that is additional information  relating to how that element's content should be displayed ".
See "Beginning XHTML" page 19

<p>This is my first XHTML document</p> The whole of this is a paragraph element.  Each (non empty) element consists of an opening tag,  in this case <p> a closing tag </p>. and the content of the element, in this case  This is my first XHTML document.
The tag is called the p tag. The element is correctly called p element type..

This is what you can read in the paragraph "Elements and Tags", page 51 of  "Beginning XHTML" written by Frank Boumphrey, Cassandra Greer, Dave Raggett, Jenny Raggett, Sebastian Schnitzenbaumer, Ted Wugofky..

Complaints ?? Mail the authors.. 

Is this so difficult to understand???


And this is what I also can read in the Dutch translation of the "HTML4 Bible, second editon". In Dutch "HTML 4.01, het complete Handboek". So I suppose it is an international convention what is meant by tag, element and attribute.. 

Greetings
Ineke van der Maat

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Simon White" <simon.white@jkd.co.uk>
To: "Access Systems" <accessys@smart.net>; "Charles F. Munat" <chas@munat.com>
Cc: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2002 5:28 PM
Subject: RE: Empty alt tags


> Hi all,
> I have been following this discussion for some time now, and it appears to me that a standardization of the WAI language would do us all a huge favour. OK, we are not going to eliminate the differences between English, American English et al, but where attribute/tag/element are concerned, then I would advocate a suitable naming convention for this. That way, no one can get confused. Good idea, or bad???
> 
> Kindest regards
> 
> Simon
Received on Friday, 22 February 2002 20:32:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:00 GMT