- From: Marcus E. Hennecke <marcush@crc.ricoh.com>
- Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 13:49:08 -0700 (PDT)
- To: www-html@w3.org, editor@mbeacon.com
On Wed, 26 Jun 1996 16:12:41 -0400, "Geoffrey Baker" <editor@mbeacon.com> wrote: > I feel we should take the "alt" subset of the "img" tag and expand its > use, thus: > to support its use in image maps by allowing the "alt" to list multiple > URL's. But image maps already have the ALT attribute: > <map name="map1"> > <AREA SHAPE=rect COORDS= "0,0, 133,14" HREF="a.htm"> > [...] > <alt><a href="a.html>Back</a><br> this would be written as: <AREA SHAPE=rect COORDS= "0,0, 133,14" HREF="a.htm" ALT="Back"> Actually, if I read the Wilbur DTD right, the ALT attribute is even *required*. I am not sure why the ALT attribute is not required for images. Maybe it's because if the IMG is actually an imagemap the ALT text comes from the AREA elements? However, the general idea of an ALT tag that would be used for new elements to provide markup for browsers that do not understand the new elements is probably useful and has been discussed at length. To date, no consensus has emerged since every possible definition seems to have at least one drawback. Marcus -- Marcus E. Hennecke marcush@crc.ricoh.com http://www.crc.ricoh.com/~marcush/
Received on Wednesday, 26 June 1996 16:49:42 UTC