W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > October 1996

Re: COUGAR: ALT and <INPUT TYPE="IMAGE">

From: Marc Salomon <marc@ckm.ucsf.edu>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 15:34:45 -0800
Message-Id: <9610301534.ZM19630@gaia.ckm.ucsf.edu>
To: www-html@w3.org

I'm concerned more with VALUE/ALT being supported by them when image loading is
disabled than with VALUE being ignored by GUI UA's that are loading images.

I'd prefer to lace my WWW application interfaces with ALT's (so that the user
can simply disable image loading to achieve an image-less version of the
application) as opposed to dealing with the overhead of generating image-less
pages for text-only support over slow connections.

I'm not sure which is worse:

1.  Adding Yet Another Attribute to INPUT for TYPE="image" to follow the ALT
convention for unavailable images.  or

2.  Recycling VALUE and breaking the ALT convention making image unavailablity
with INPUT into a special case.

Its all well and good that lynx works well with VALUE, but I'd prefer to see an
single-implementation-independent standard.

-marc

On Oct 30, 17:26, Foteos Macrides wrote:
> Subject: Re: COUGAR: ALT and <INPUT TYPE="IMAGE">
> Marc Salomon <marc@ckm.ucsf.edu> wrote:
> >Should there be an ALT attribute available on <INPUT TYPE="IMAGE"> so that
> >the submit action involved can be conveyed when the image is not available?
>
> 	No.  Use VALUE, as you would for TYPE="submit".  It'll be ignored
> by GUIs.  See:
>
>   http://www.nyu.edu/pages/wsn/subir/lynx/lynx_help/Lynx_users_guide.html#19
>
> 				Fote
>
> =========================================================================
>  Foteos Macrides            Worcester Foundation for Biomedical Research
>  MACRIDES@SCI.WFBR.EDU         222 Maple Avenue, Shrewsbury, MA 01545
> =========================================================================
>-- End of excerpt from Foteos Macrides



-- 
Received on Wednesday, 30 October 1996 18:33:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 30 April 2020 16:20:26 UTC