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.