W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > September 2001

RE: "alt" attribute required by XHTML 1.0

From: Peter Foti (PeterF) <PeterF@SystolicNetworks.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 13:32:59 -0400
Message-ID: <A10A983C9DFBD4119F0300104B2EA6B7085F03@ZIPPY>
To: "'Matt Brooks'" <matt@mbjlp.com>
Cc: "'www-html@w3.org'" <www-html@w3.org>
No, actually I think you are incorrect.  I'm 99% sure that the major
browsers will NOT display an empty tooltip with this:
alt=""

But I think some WILL display an empty tooltip if you do this:
alt=" "

You should be fine using alt="".  If I'm wrong about this, please let me
know which browser you've seen this behaviour with.

Thanks,
Peter Foti


> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-html-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:www-html-request@w3.org]On Behalf
> Of Matt Brooks
> Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 1:08 PM
> To: Philip TAYLOR
> Cc: www-html
> Subject: Re: "alt" attribute required by XHTML 1.0
> 
> 
> No, because "" produces an empty (but displayed) tooltip in 
> some browsers.
> This is unacceptable.
> Thank you for your reply.
>  - Matt
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Philip TAYLOR" <P.Taylor@rhul.ac.uk>
> To: "Matt Brooks" <matt@mbjlp.com>
> Cc: "www-html" <www-html@w3.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 6:06 PM
> Subject: Re: "alt" attribute required by XHTML 1.0
> 
> 
> > Surely if ALT is not semantically required (e.g., for a 
> spacer image),
> > 'ALT=""' is a perfectly acceptable compromise, is it not?
> >
> > Philip Taylor, RHBNC
> > --------
> > Matt Brooks wrote:
> > >
> > > I was surprised to see that the ALT attribrute is 
> required by the XHTML
> 1.0 Transitional DTD. I was going to use XHTML 1.0 
> Transitional in a web
> development project, but have now changed my mind because the 
> ALT attributes
> are not needed on every image.
> > >
> > >  - Matt
> 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 5 September 2001 13:26:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:49 GMT