Re: Questionable implementation of IMG ALT attribute as tooltips

Green J M K (jmkgre@essex.ac.uk)
Tue, 27 Jan 1998 14:29:33 +0000 (GMT)


Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 14:29:33 +0000 (GMT)
From: Green J M K <jmkgre@essex.ac.uk>
To: Colin F Reynolds <colin@the-net-effect.com>
Cc: www-html@w3.org
In-Reply-To: <JbushBCWjQz0EwRO@the-net-effect.com>
Message-Id: <Pine.ULT.3.91.980127142337.27246C-100000@serdlc36.essex.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Questionable implementation of IMG ALT attribute as tooltips



On Mon, 26 Jan 1998, Colin F Reynolds wrote:

[ ... ]

> I agree 100%.
> 
> So, AIUI, you are confirming that the position of the W3C is that the
      ~~~~
Sorry, Colin, you've got me there?

> implementation of the IMG element's ALT attribute as a tooltip is BAD,
> and that a viable alternative exists in the recommendation.

No, it's saying that the TITLE attribute may be used as a tooltip. Be it 
good, or be it bad, it seems that if the v4 browsers can't find a TITLE 
attribute, they'll use the ALT tag instead.

Apols if I mis-read the quote and got it wrong.

> 
> Hopefully I can now go away and mark up my content in the manner you
> describe above in the knowledge that, although in the short term non-
> compliant browsers will produce a misleading rendering of my documents,
> in the longer term the flawed implementations will be replaced by
> compliant versions.

They are not misleading unless you give irrelevant, wrong or useless 
information.