ALT tag in FireFox?

Discussion in 'HTML' started by ..., Mar 11, 2005.

  1. ...

    ... Guest

    anyone has got idea, how to show hint string on web page?

    in IE, ALT tag works fine, in FireFox it doesn't : (
     
    ..., Mar 11, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. ...

    ... Guest

    TITLE works fine :D
     
    ..., Mar 11, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. ...

    saz Guest

    In article <d0s9u7$fpn$>, says...
    > anyone has got idea, how to show hint string on web page?
    >
    > in IE, ALT tag works fine, in FireFox it doesn't : (
    >
    >
    >

    alt tag on mouseover is not supported in FF, but title is. alt tags in
    FF only displays if the image does not load.
     
    saz, Mar 11, 2005
    #3
  4. saz wrote:
    > In article <d0s9u7$fpn$>, says...
    >> anyone has got idea, how to show hint string on web page?
    >>
    >> in IE, ALT tag works fine, in FireFox it doesn't : (
    >>
    >>
    >>

    > alt tag on mouseover is not supported in FF, but title is. alt tags
    > in FF only displays if the image does not load.


    I think I read in the Firefox bumph somewhere that Firefox is keeping to W3C
    compliancy and using ALT as it was meant to be used.

    It's a good road to get back to if IE has allowed us over the years to write
    in a way we shouldn't be doing. I know this full well! ;-)


    Richard.
     
    Richard Brooks, Mar 11, 2005
    #4
  5. saz wrote:
    > In article <d0s9u7$fpn$>, says...
    >
    >>anyone has got idea, how to show hint string on web page?
    >>
    >>in IE, ALT tag works fine, in FireFox it doesn't : (
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >
    > alt tag on mouseover is not supported in FF, but title is. alt tags in
    > FF only displays if the image does not load.


    Which is what I believe the intended purpose of the ALT tag was, to
    display an alternate description of the image if the image was either
    missing or unavailable for text-only browsers.

    Use TITLE and if you want to include the small sample of legacy browsers
    4x browsers that displayed the ALT as a tool tip duplicate in the ALT tag.

    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
     
    Jonathan N. Little, Mar 11, 2005
    #5
  6. ...

    Dave Patton Guest

    "..." <> wrote in news:d0s9u7$fpn$:

    > anyone has got idea, how to show hint string on web page?
    >
    > in IE, ALT tag works fine, in FireFox it doesn't : (


    IE does it wrong, FF does it correctly.
    The ALT tag contents are intended as text to be
    used when the image cannot be displayed, not as
    a "tooltip".

    --
    Dave Patton
    Canadian Coordinator, Degree Confluence Project
    http://www.confluence.org/
    My website: http://members.shaw.ca/davepatton/
     
    Dave Patton, Mar 11, 2005
    #6
  7. ...

    Andy Dingley Guest

    It was somewhere outside Barstow when "Jonathan N. Little"
    <> wrote:

    >Which is what I believe the intended purpose of the ALT tag was, to
    >display an alternate description of the image if the image was either
    >missing or unavailable for text-only browsers.


    I just wish that if loading the image does happen to fail, FF showed
    the alt text with some sort of "missing image" icon, not just the
    plain text on its own.
     
    Andy Dingley, Mar 11, 2005
    #7
  8. ...

    jake Guest

    In message <d0s9u7$fpn$>, ... <>
    writes
    >anyone has got idea, how to show hint string on web page?
    >
    >in IE, ALT tag works fine, in FireFox it doesn't : (
    >

    In all cases (including IE) you should be using the contents of
    "TITLE=........." for the tool-tip.

    "ALT=......" is the image description -- designed to be displayed when
    the image can't.

    IE just happens to display the ALT contents if it can't find a TITLE
    (whether it should or shouldn't is a subject for debate -- but not by me
    ;-)

    regards.
    >


    --
    Jake
     
    jake, Mar 11, 2005
    #8
  9. Andy Dingley wrote:
    > I just wish that if loading the image does happen to fail, FF showed
    > the alt text with some sort of "missing image" icon, not just the
    > plain text on its own.


    Why? If the alt text really replaces the image's content, why would the
    visitor care whether there was an image that failed to load?
     
    Leif K-Brooks, Mar 11, 2005
    #9
  10. ...

    Andy Dingley Guest

    It was somewhere outside Barstow when Leif K-Brooks
    <> wrote:

    >Why? If the alt text really replaces the image's content,


    It doesn't - there's supposed to be an image, the author wanted one,
    the browser user wanted one, but the network failed to deliver it. The
    text is a partial substitute, not a perfect replacement for it - the
    user should still be notified.
     
    Andy Dingley, Mar 11, 2005
    #10
  11. ...

    n|ck Guest

    Leif K-Brooks wrote:
    > Why? If the alt text really replaces the image's content, why would the
    > visitor care whether there was an image that failed to load?


    In some cases, the layout may not look right if the dimensions of the image are
    not set. I believe that in FF, the image dimensions are not set if the image is
    not found. It's pretty annoying - I guess you could style the dimensions if you
    had to but I haven't tested that and don't know if it works.
     
    n|ck, Mar 11, 2005
    #11
  12. n|ck wrote:

    > Leif K-Brooks wrote:


    >> Why? If the alt text really replaces the image's content, why would the
    >> visitor care whether there was an image that failed to load?


    > In some cases, the layout may not look right if the dimensions of the image are
    > not set. I believe that in FF, the image dimensions are not set if the image is
    > not found. It's pretty annoying - I guess you could style the dimensions if you
    > had to but I haven't tested that and don't know if it works.


    FF 1.01/Linux, here: right -- the defined dimensions aren't rendered as an empty
    box if image not found.

    --
    Blinky Linux Registered User 297263
    Who has implemented Usenet Solution #45933:
    Now killing all posts originating at Google Groups
     
    Blinky the Shark, Mar 12, 2005
    #12
  13. ...

    Toby Inkster Guest

    Blinky the Shark wrote:

    > FF 1.01/Linux, here: right -- the defined dimensions aren't rendered as
    > an empty box if image not found.


    With Opera, the defined dimensions are rendered if the image doesn't load,
    but are ignored if the user has disabled images.

    --
    Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
    Contact Me ~ http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact
    Now Playing ~ ./matchbox_twenty/smooth_-_with_santana.ogg
     
    Toby Inkster, Mar 12, 2005
    #13
  14. ...

    Andy Dingley Guest

    It was somewhere outside Barstow when n|ck <>
    wrote:

    >In some cases, the layout may not look right if the dimensions of the image are
    >not set.


    I don't mind that - the page is broken, the layout can break too. But
    I'd like some clear feedback that the page _is_ broken (i.e. there
    ought to be an image there).
     
    Andy Dingley, Mar 12, 2005
    #14
  15. Toby Inkster wrote:

    > Blinky the Shark wrote:


    >> FF 1.01/Linux, here: right -- the defined dimensions aren't rendered
    >> as an empty box if image not found.


    > With Opera, the defined dimensions are rendered if the image doesn't
    > load, but are ignored if the user has disabled images.


    To similarly round out my own comment: With FF the defined dimensions
    are also not rendered as an empty box if user has disabled images.

    --
    Blinky Linux Registered User 297263
    Who has implemented Usenet Solution #45933:
    Now killing all posts originating at Google Groups
     
    Blinky the Shark, Mar 12, 2005
    #15
  16. ...

    data64 Guest

    Andy Dingley <> wrote in
    news::

    > I don't mind that - the page is broken, the layout can break too. But
    > I'd like some clear feedback that the page _is_ broken (i.e. there
    > ought to be an image there).
    >


    Except that with the popular practise of blocking ads using a hosts file,
    this becomes undesirable.

    data64
     
    data64, Mar 12, 2005
    #16
  17. ...

    Andy Dingley Guest

    It was somewhere outside Barstow when data64 <> wrote:

    >Except that with the popular practise of blocking ads using a hosts file,
    >this becomes undesirable.


    I don't think this is necessarily such a bad thing. Even if I don't
    want ads, a small icon and any alt text (as IE does it) isn't too
    offensive.

    What I don't like about FF's behaviour is that's impossible for me to
    tell that there _should_ have been an image there. This can make many
    pages misleading.
     
    Andy Dingley, Mar 12, 2005
    #17
  18. Andy Dingley wrote:
    > It was somewhere outside Barstow when data64 <> wrote:


    >>Except that with the popular practise of blocking ads using a hosts file,
    >>this becomes undesirable.


    > I don't think this is necessarily such a bad thing. Even if I don't
    > want ads, a small icon and any alt text (as IE does it) isn't too
    > offensive.


    > What I don't like about FF's behaviour is that's impossible for me to
    > tell that there _should_ have been an image there. This can make many
    > pages misleading.


    Might want to try the AdBlock extension, set to retain the spaces the ads
    would use.

    --
    Blinky Linux Registered User 297263
    Who has implemented Usenet Solution #45933:
    Now killing all posts originating at Google Groups
     
    Blinky the Shark, Mar 12, 2005
    #18
  19. Richard Brooks wrote:
    > saz wrote:
    >> In article <d0s9u7$fpn$>, says...
    >>> anyone has got idea, how to show hint string on web page?
    >>>
    >>> in IE, ALT tag works fine, in FireFox it doesn't : (
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>

    >> alt tag on mouseover is not supported in FF, but title is. alt tags
    >> in FF only displays if the image does not load.

    >
    > I think I read in the Firefox bumph somewhere that Firefox is keeping
    > to W3C compliancy and using ALT as it was meant to be used.
    >
    > It's a good road to get back to if IE has allowed us over the years
    > to write in a way we shouldn't be doing. I know this full well! ;-)
    >

    [Added]

    I found this printout as I'm having to rewrite my lazy coding.

    <http://www.computergripes.com/firefoxsites.html>

    It might be interesting to you.


    Richard.
     
    Richard Brooks, Mar 12, 2005
    #19
  20. ...

    dredmon

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2006
    Messages:
    1
    As a person who used the internet in 1995 and for the sake of speed people over 14.4 or 28.8 dialup would turn off image loading. Alt tags can allow you to still use the graphic navigation buttons and so forth. I know that is wicked old school but I'm sure that is why the option still exists today.

    My question would be, do website "readers" for the visually impaired read the TITLE tag? I had always worked form the premise that they read from the ALT tag.
     
    dredmon, Oct 26, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Do
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    3,035
    Ken Cox [Microsoft MVP]
    Nov 23, 2003
  2. shruds
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    932
    John C. Bollinger
    Jan 27, 2006
  3. =?iso-8859-1?Q?Marcel_St=F6r?=

    alt attribute for input tag

    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Marcel_St=F6r?=, Nov 28, 2003, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    11,045
    Sid Ismail
    Nov 28, 2003
  4. Paul Furman

    alt tag for an anchor link?

    Paul Furman, Feb 12, 2004, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    43,997
    JohnNotion
    Apr 13, 2012
  5. Suzanne Knapp

    alt and title in <img> tag?

    Suzanne Knapp, Jul 4, 2005, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    700
    Blinky the Shark
    Jul 5, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page