- From: Liam Quinn <liam@htmlhelp.com>
- Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 11:57:23 -0500
- To: "Charles F. Munat" <coder@acnet.net>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
At 11:52 PM 24/10/98 -0500, Charles F. Munat wrote: >>At 11:17 p.m. 10/24/98 -0500, Charles F. Munat wrote: >>>On my copy of pwWebspeak, it reads the title tags, too. So going from alt >to >>>title doesn't seem to make any difference. And it seems pointless to me to >>>use an Alt="" attribute just for the sake of Bobby Approval. >> >>Kynn Bartlett wrote: >>ALT="" is not pointless. It's a good coding technique for making >>pages that look good in all browsers. >> >You lost me here. How does ALT="" make a page look good in all browsers? ALT="" tells the browser that the image has no replacement. Omitting the ALT attribute tells the browser that the author didn't think about ALT text (since so few do). In such cases, some browsers will use "[INLINE]" or "[filename of image]" to tell the user "Hey, there's an image here--it could be important." With ALT="", those browsers would display nothing in place of the image. Note also that the ALT attribute is required in HTML 4.0. -- Liam Quinn
Received on Sunday, 25 October 1998 11:57:20 UTC