On 9 Sep 2000 15:57:05 -0400, Warp wrote:
>Peter J. Holzer <hjp### [at] sikituwsracat> wrote:
>: The alt tag is mandatory in
>: HTML, though you could argue that nobody will use to text browser to
>: view a CD full of images :-)
>
>  The alt-tag doesn't only work for formatting better in text browsers,
>but it can only be used for a kind-of tooltip (at least in the most recent
>versions of graphical browsers, I think).

Yes. Some graphical browsers (Netscape >= 4.0, maybe IE) show the alt
text in a tool tip. I find this behaviour seriously annoying.

>  The correct way of doing it would be something like this:
>
>
>This <a href="image.jpg"><img src="image.jpg" alt="[IMAGE]" border=0></a>
>is a Povray image.

Are there any text browsers which need the extra link? After all the URL
is already embedded in the <img> tag and it is up to the browser to
enable the user to identify, retrieve and possibly display the image.
Lynx and w3m both do this. 

Also "[IMAGE]" isn't very descriptive, as somebody alse noted already.


>  Also the correct alt-tag for non-essential decorations (which do not
>contribute to the text) is: alt=""

Right.

	hp

-- 
   _  | Peter J. Holzer    | Nicht an Tueren mangelt es,
|_|_) | Sysadmin WSR       | sondern an der Einrichtung (aka Content).
| |   | hjp### [at] wsracat      |    -- Ale### [at] univieacat
__/   | http://www.hjp.at/ |       zum Thema Portale in at.linux

Post a reply to this message