- From: James Green <jmkgre@essex.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 18:06:40 +0000 (GMT)
- To: www-html@w3.org
On Fri, 23 Jan 1998 15:47:21 +0000 Colin F Reynolds <colin@the-net-effect.com> wrote: > I refuse to clutter up www-html with this, but I couldn't let it pass. > > In article <Pine.ULT.3.91.980123123225.727B- > 100000@serdlc27.essex.ac.uk>, Green J M K <jmkgre@essex.ac.uk> writes > >> For instance, consider a biography of Lincoln. The role of a picture > >> might be just decorative, or orientative; it's sort of normal to > >> put a picture into a biography. In such a case, using ALT="" is best, > > > >Try using a browser that has images switched off. Seeing "" might just > >raise curiosity. > > ROFL! > > For a while, I was beginning to think that you had spent some time > researching this issue, as some others have, instead of just spouting > your mouth off. > > FYI, ALT="" is generally rendered as _nothing_ since "" is an empty > string. > > Are you really this clueless, or are you trolling? The *only* reason I said that was because I'd never tried it before (which is why I gave the warning). The fact of the matter is that I've never *needed* to use ALT="" because I've always come up with a reasonable ALT description quickly. I used "" because I *thought* it may produce the smallest possible on-screen information area, and therefore useful to the original thread-creator. Apologies for not having tried this beforehand, but at least I gave a warning. BTW, what exactly would **you** suggest? Regards, James Green Term e-mail: jmkgre@essex.ac.uk | Home e-mail: jg@cyberstorm.demon.co.uk Homepage: http://www.cyberstorm.demon.co.uk
Received on Friday, 23 January 1998 13:06:24 UTC