- From: David Poehlman <poehlman@clark.net>
- Date: Wed, 5 Nov 1997 07:47:19 -0500 (EST)
- To: Gregg Vanderheiden <po@trace.wisc.edu>
- cc: "'Charles (Chuck) Oppermann'" <chuckop@MICROSOFT.com>, "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
alt is short for alternative and in this case, it is an alternative to image and usually stands for the image as in Chuck's description. I suggest that title be used as a title. this would be less confusing. it should be pointed out that if the image serves a function than alt should state it but it should also be obvious in some way that a picture is being replaced with text. let a d or description link or page stand for describing in minute detail if desired the image. On Tue, 4 Nov 1997, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote: > Chuck you wrote: > My point is that ALT is needed to give a *description* of the image. In > this example, that could be ALT="spinning red globe". With the advent of > TITLE, we can go back to using ALT for it's original intention. > > I see your point with regard to TITLE. If it is used to express the > function then alt could be used for description. > However, if browsers are looking for function in the ALT then function > still needs to be there. At least for foreseeable future. > Question: if there is an alt and a title, which appears on screen > instead of the graphic? I thought it was ALT. Does it vary? > > By the way. A bit of history. I believe the original intention of ALT was > for function though it is hard to say since it was used both ways. It was > introduced by the same group (in Kansas) that developed lynx and dos-lynx > if I am remembering my conversation with them correctly from many years > ago. It was introduced to make pages make sense in lynx when the images > are not there - as they never are in lynx. Lynx users were generally less > interested in what the images looked like than what they represented or > were there to signify. Decorative images however did get a descriptive > ALT (or they got ALT=""). > > Anyway. Back to the present. > - Does anyone know when there is an alt and a title, which appears on > screen instead of the graphic? > - Should we be making a recommendation on this? > - Should our recommendation take into account the fact that TITLE is > possible now? > - Will people do both - or are we likely to only see ALT? > - If we did use ALT as the primary FUNCTION description -(because function > is the most important attribute and ALT is the most likely to be used) then > what would be the best use of TITLE? > - If title is not used for function, then is this counterintuitive for the > use of TITLE in other places for function? > > Wish I had as many answers as questions. > > Gregg > > -- ------------------------------ > Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. > Professor - Human Factors > Dept of Ind. Engr. - U of Wis. > Director - Trace R & D Center > gv@trace.wisc.edu http://trace.wisc.edu > FAX 608/262-8848 > For a list of our listserves send "lists" to listproc@trace.wisc.edu > > > Hands-On-Technolog(eye)s touching the internet voice: 1-(301) 949-7599 poehlman@clark.net ftp://ftp.clark.net/pub/poehlman http://www.clark.net/pub/poehlman
Received on Wednesday, 5 November 1997 07:47:39 UTC