ALT text block for image

[Robert Frost-Bridges]

Wouldn't work for image maps, which is what the OP's talking about.
For other images, what's wrong with adding a caption with ordinary
CSS?

Sorry Leif, I wasn't actually serious, I was just trying to illustrate
why alternate text was 'alternate' and not complimentary.
Not very well obviously.

 

[Neal]

And how is that different from an optional way to view details about an
image that is called a tooltip?

In the viewport vs external to the viewport. Since it appears on hover,
the user can get this without you wanting it. You can get it with title,
but you shouldn't get it with alt.

Mind you, I'm not arguing that it's a tragic problem, just that there's no
really good reason to do that.

 

[Mark Parnell]

I'm still wondering why Firefox screws it up. Anyone know?

By screws it up, I assume you mean that it doesn't display the whole
title? Mozilla does the same. I get:
"This is an extremely long title, intended to wrap and take up some
serious space, which..."

Weird. Kind of defeats the purpose, doesn't it?

 

[Jukka K. Korpela]

But though it is specified as an alternative, that does not mean it
is bad for a browser to tell the user what the alternate text is in a
secondary manner.

That might be your opinion, but as you see, alt is _defined_ as an
alternative. It's not just our calling it that way.

For instance, Firefox will show the reader an image's alternate text
if the reader right-clicks and selects "properties." Do you see
anything wrong with this behavior?

No, not any more that it is wrong for a browser to make e.g. meta element
attributes available in a comparable way, despite the fact that those
attributes shall not be rendered as part of the content proper.

The practical difference between tooltip effects and the Properties
display is that the latter involves a conscious user decision and action,
whereas the tooltip just pops up when you move the mouse _and_ this in
turn has misled authors into thinking that such behavior is the defined
meaning of alt attributes _and_ something they can count on.

Similarly, it is of course acceptable that a user style sheet is used to
make the alt attribute value displayed after (or below or whatever) an
image - and it would not be acceptable to have a browser that behaves in
such a way, e.g. due to its default style sheet.

 

[Michael Fesser]

.oO(Mark Parnell)

By screws it up, I assume you mean that it doesn't display the whole
title? Mozilla does the same. I get:
"This is an extremely long title, intended to wrap and take up some
serious space, which..."

Weird. Kind of defeats the purpose, doesn't it?

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45375

Micha

 

[Mark Parnell]

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45375

Thanks. I did have a quick search, but couldn't find anything.

 

[Starshine Moonbeam]

commentary. I want the user to be able to see the whole map and when
the mouse hovers over a position on the map, they can see the
commentary about that particular site.

[...]

You could probably do something with brucie's butterflies,
http://www.porjes.com/butterflies/index.php

Slice the map up in to separate images and then as the users click their
way around the relevant text pops up with any further links required
included.

Actually, I already have that. You've probably misread what my
problem is. I am already trying to display relevant text in the pop
up -- which it does. What it doesn't do, is remain on the screen long
enough to read ALL of the relevant text.

Then your text is too long.

<img src="whatever.jpg" alt="whatever" />

alt's just meant to provide a brief description for whatever the picture
is for those that can't see the image. (doesn't load, user's blind,
etc...)

 

[Neal]

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45375

Wow, over 4 years old. Can anyone verify the patches at this site work?

 

[Neal]

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45375

Wow, over 4 years old. Can anyone verify the patches at this site work?

 

[Jukka K. Korpela]

alt's just meant to provide a brief description for whatever the
picture is for those that can't see the image.

No, it's meant to _say_ the same thing as the image, as far as possible.

In most cases, there's no point in describing an image that the user does
not see.

 

[Starshine Moonbeam]

No, it's meant to _say_ the same thing as the image, as far as possible.

In most cases, there's no point in describing an image that the user does
not see.

Good point. Thx.