Date: Sat, 24 Jan 1998 14:46:26 -0500 (EST) From: Bill Bereza <email@example.com> To: Liam Quinn <firstname.lastname@example.org> cc: Jordan Reiter <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org In-Reply-To: <email@example.com> Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.96.980124143420.11185Afirstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Re: Questionable implementation of IMG ALT attribute as tooltips On Sat, 24 Jan 1998, Liam Quinn wrote: > Here, the meaning is redundant. A speech browser, search engine, or Lynx > would render the above example as > > Warning: Warning: This must be > done by a qualified technician. > > Oops. Hopefully people now see why ALT="" would be more appropriate in > this case. If the warning icon were moved in front of the text > "Warning:", then ALT="**" or something similar might be useful. > Well, if you have an icon which means warning, you have to wonder whether it's necessary to have the text "Warning:" in the text in addition to the image. So if you just removed "Warning:" and left "Warning:" as the ALT text for the image, it would make more sense. This is a case where an image can actually be used in place of text, and perfectly shows where ALT is really useful: <IMG src=triange.gif alt="Warning:"> This must be done by a ... Bill Bereza email@example.com http://www.pobox.com/~bereza/ Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes.