alt vs title in explorer 7 & firefox

Discussion in 'HTML' started by GreatArtist, Jul 8, 2007.

  1. GreatArtist

    GreatArtist Guest

    I have internet explorer 7 and firefox 2.
    I set my web page to be XHTML 1.0 transitional.
    I put the alt attribute in my image tags but they were only displayed
    in firefox, not IE7.
    So I changed all the alt attributes to title instead. That works in
    both IE7 and Firefox.
    But now when I use the W3C xhtml validator, it tells me I should have
    alt for all the image tags.
    Should I include both title and alt in each image tag?
    Why doesn't alt work in IE7? Didn't alt work in previous versions of
    IE?
     
    GreatArtist, Jul 8, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. GreatArtist

    J.O. Aho Guest

    GreatArtist wrote:
    > I have internet explorer 7 and firefox 2.
    > I set my web page to be XHTML 1.0 transitional.
    > I put the alt attribute in my image tags but they were only displayed
    > in firefox, not IE7.
    > So I changed all the alt attributes to title instead. That works in
    > both IE7 and Firefox.
    > But now when I use the W3C xhtml validator, it tells me I should have
    > alt for all the image tags.
    > Should I include both title and alt in each image tag?
    > Why doesn't alt work in IE7? Didn't alt work in previous versions of
    > IE?


    Yes, you should have both.
    As far as I can recall, the alt is meant to be displayed when the image is
    missing, while the title is shown when you hover with the mouse pointer over
    the image.

    Alt has worked as title in earlier versions of MSIE, there can be two reasons
    why alt don't generate a "pop-up", the most likely is that MS has a bug in the
    code (which is quite common), or they wanted to follow the standard more closely.


    --

    //Aho
     
    J.O. Aho, Jul 8, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. GreatArtist

    dorayme Guest

    In article <>,
    "J.O. Aho" <> wrote:

    > GreatArtist wrote:
    > > I have internet explorer 7 and firefox 2.
    > > I set my web page to be XHTML 1.0 transitional.
    > > I put the alt attribute in my image tags but they were only displayed
    > > in firefox, not IE7.
    > > So I changed all the alt attributes to title instead. That works in
    > > both IE7 and Firefox.
    > > But now when I use the W3C xhtml validator, it tells me I should have
    > > alt for all the image tags.
    > > Should I include both title and alt in each image tag?
    > > Why doesn't alt work in IE7? Didn't alt work in previous versions of
    > > IE?

    >
    > Yes, you should have both.
    > As far as I can recall, the alt is meant to be displayed when the image is
    > missing, while the title is shown when you hover with the mouse pointer over
    > the image.
    >
    > Alt has worked as title in earlier versions of MSIE, there can be two reasons
    > why alt don't generate a "pop-up", the most likely is that MS has a bug in
    > the
    > code (which is quite common), or they wanted to follow the standard more
    > closely.


    I don't think you _should_ have both. You should have the alt.
    You may have the title if you want the tool-tip. But you are
    perfectly entitled not to want this.

    In Witness, John Book asks what is wrong with buttons when trying
    on a suit that Rachel has modified for his size. He asks if there
    is something wrong with buttons, there being no buttons. The
    reply is that no buttons is plain and good. In fact, Amish
    authors are forbidden by their church to have title attributes.

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Jul 8, 2007
    #3
  4. Scripsit GreatArtist:

    > I set my web page to be XHTML 1.0 transitional.


    Thanks for the bogosity alert. (You didn't read the group much before
    posting. It is frequently explained in this group why XHTML is almost always
    useless as the delivery format of web pages and why using the transitional
    version is even more pointless.)

    > I put the alt attribute in my image tags but they were only displayed
    > in firefox, not IE7.


    You don't know what the alt attribute means. Read a book on HTML, or at
    least a primer. Then perhaps the great monography on alt attributes:
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/html/alt.html

    > So I changed all the alt attributes to title instead. That works in
    > both IE7 and Firefox.


    No, it's just your illusion.

    > But now when I use the W3C xhtml validator, it tells me I should have
    > alt for all the image tags.


    Of course. Except that it says "shall", not "should".

    > Should I include both title and alt in each image tag?


    You should stop working on web pages before you understand the basics,
    including the alt attribute.

    --
    Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
     
    Jukka K. Korpela, Jul 8, 2007
    #4
  5. GreatArtist

    John Hosking Guest

    GreatArtist wrote:
    > I have internet explorer 7 and firefox 2.


    You must be very proud.

    > I set my web page to be XHTML 1.0 transitional.


    I take it back.

    > I put the alt attribute in my image tags but they were only displayed
    > in firefox, not IE7.


    I do believe that either you've got the browsers backwards or you're
    talking about title instead of the al attribute.

    > So I changed all the alt attributes to title instead. That works in
    > both IE7 and Firefox.


    Depends on what you mean by "works."

    > But now when I use the W3C xhtml validator, it tells me I should have
    > alt for all the image tags.
    > Should I include both title and alt in each image tag?


    For images which comprise content, yes (I say). Backgrounds no.
    Ornamental images are somewhat special; use alt="". See the discussion
    at http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/html/alt.html.

    > Why doesn't alt work in IE7? Didn't alt work in previous versions of
    > IE?


    "Work," meaning "providing tooltips?" IE has sort of misused alt for
    years/versions (maybe forever). But the alt texts are just meant to
    stand in for images when they can't be displayed or seen. The title is
    what should be used for tooltip-type behavior. AIUI, non-IE browsers
    (except e.g. versions of Opera emulating IE) use tooltips based on
    title, alternate texts based on alt.

    --
    John
    Pondering the value of the UIP: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
     
    John Hosking, Jul 8, 2007
    #5
  6. GreatArtist

    GreatArtist Guest

    On Jul 8, 1:30 am, John Hosking <>
    wrote:
    > You must be very proud.


    Why are you being a sarcastic jerk?

    > Pondering the value of the UIP:http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html


    Regarding your link, I think the best thing to improve Usenet would be
    for people like you and Jerka Korpela to stop making sarcastic, rude,
    insulting comments that are unprovoked and stop being arrogant
    assholes. Learn how to be decent human beings.
     
    GreatArtist, Jul 8, 2007
    #6
  7. GreatArtist

    GreatArtist Guest

    On Jul 8, 12:23 am, "Jukka K. Korpela" <> wrote:
    >> (a lot of arrogant pissing contest bullshit)


    Jerka, you're a miserable piece of shit.
    The other two guys were helpful and actually answered my questions.
    Yes I just recently read books on HTML, XHTML, and CSS.
    Tonight it just took me about 15 minutes to get all my web pages down
    to zero errors on the W3C validator.

    I don't care what you think about XHTML. I didn't ask you!
    Garrick Chow, who I respect far more than you, recommends XHTML 1.0
    transitional. I don't trust your opinions on anything since you're an
    ass-wipe and a poor excuse for a human being.

    Your overly simplistic web site sucks. It's worthless.
    You're an idiot and emotionally stunted.
     
    GreatArtist, Jul 8, 2007
    #7
  8. GreatArtist

    GreatArtist Guest

    On Jul 8, 12:05 am, "J.O. Aho" <> wrote:
    > GreatArtist wrote:
    > > I have internet explorer 7 and firefox 2.
    > > I set my web page to be XHTML 1.0 transitional.
    > > I put the alt attribute in my image tags but they were only displayed
    > > in firefox, not IE7.
    > > So I changed all the alt attributes to title instead. That works in
    > > both IE7 and Firefox.
    > > But now when I use the W3C xhtml validator, it tells me I should have
    > > alt for all the image tags.
    > > Should I include both title and alt in each image tag?
    > > Why doesn't alt work in IE7? Didn't alt work in previous versions of
    > > IE?

    >
    > Yes, you should have both.
    > As far as I can recall, the alt is meant to be displayed when the image is
    > missing, while the title is shown when you hover with the mouse pointer over
    > the image.
    >
    > Alt has worked as title in earlier versions of MSIE, there can be two reasons
    > why alt don't generate a "pop-up", the most likely is that MS has a bug in the
    > code (which is quite common), or they wanted to follow the standard more closely.
    >
    > --
    >
    > //Aho


    Thanks for giving me a good answer, unlike Jerka and John.
    Thanks for being a good person.
     
    GreatArtist, Jul 8, 2007
    #8
  9. GreatArtist

    dorayme Guest

    In article
    <>,
    GreatArtist <> wrote:

    > > Alt has worked as title in earlier versions of MSIE, there can be two
    > > reasons
    > > why alt don't generate a "pop-up", the most likely is that MS has a bug in
    > > the
    > > code (which is quite common), or they wanted to follow the standard more
    > > closely.
    > >
    > > --
    > >
    > > //Aho

    >
    > Thanks for giving me a good answer, unlike Jerka and John.
    > Thanks for being a good person.


    Hang on there... what about me (ok, I am not human, but I feel
    left out nevertheless)? I supplied crucial info about title in
    anchors not being necessary. Did you go see Witness? A
    masterpiece.

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Jul 8, 2007
    #9
  10. GreatArtist

    GreatArtist Guest

    On Jul 8, 6:14 am, dorayme <> wrote:
    > Hang on there... what about me (ok, I am not human, but I feel
    > left out nevertheless)? I supplied crucial info about title in
    > anchors not being necessary. Did you go see Witness? A
    > masterpiece.


    Haha, OK you too :)
    I appreciate it.
    Thanks.
     
    GreatArtist, Jul 8, 2007
    #10
  11. GreatArtist

    John Hosking Guest

    GreatArtist wrote:
    > On Jul 8, 1:30 am, John Hosking <>
    > wrote:
    >> You must be very proud.

    >
    > Why are you being a sarcastic jerk?
    >
    >> Pondering the value of the UIP:http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

    >
    > Regarding your link, I think the best thing to improve Usenet would be
    > for people like you and Jerka Korpela to stop making sarcastic, rude,
    > insulting comments that are unprovoked and stop being arrogant
    > assholes. Learn how to be decent human beings.


    Decency is calling people "jerks" and "assholes"? Thanks for the new
    definition. I guess I will have to revise my thinking.

    HAND!

    --
    John
    Pondering the value of the UIP: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
    .... and getting more and more convinced...
     
    John Hosking, Jul 8, 2007
    #11
  12. Scripsit GreatArtist:

    > On Jul 8, 12:23 am, "Jukka K. Korpela" <> wrote:
    >>> (a lot of arrogant pissing contest bullshit)

    >
    > Jerka, you're a miserable piece of shit.


    You're a disgusting coward who insults people, hiding behind a nickname. I'd
    rather be pig's vomit or rotten shit than anything like that.

    > Yes I just recently read books on HTML, XHTML, and CSS.


    There are lots of bad books on them. Besides, reading is not enough;
    comprehension is required. You have already demonstrated that you didn't
    learn much. You would need a good book on basics.

    --
    Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
     
    Jukka K. Korpela, Jul 8, 2007
    #12
  13. Scripsit dorayme:

    > I supplied crucial info about title in
    > anchors not being necessary.


    You didn't mention that they are of dubitable value, and besides, the issue
    was title and alt attributes for <img>, not <a>.

    Moreover, you were not insulted by "GreatArtist", so you must have written
    something wrong, or irony that was too difficult to understand to he/she/it.

    --
    Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
     
    Jukka K. Korpela, Jul 8, 2007
    #13
  14. GreatArtist

    Neredbojias Guest

    On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 13:01:32 GMT GreatArtist scribed:

    > On Jul 8, 1:30 am, John Hosking <>
    > wrote:
    >> You must be very proud.

    >
    > Why are you being a sarcastic jerk?
    >
    >> Pondering the value of the UIP:http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

    >
    > Regarding your link, I think the best thing to improve Usenet would be
    > for people like you and Jerka Korpela to stop making sarcastic, rude,
    > insulting comments that are unprovoked and stop being arrogant
    > assholes. Learn how to be decent human beings.


    Here's something you should realize. Jukka has learned English as a second
    language, and being a very intelligent man, has done so very well. He
    probably knows and uses it better than many native Brits, Yanks, and
    particularly Australians. However, his primary vernacular, Finnish, is
    more elemental in its constructs from being more primitive in development.
    Having such a limited fundament naturally precludes the ability to access
    many of the finer and sublime nuances of communication available in richer
    languages - such as English. Ergo, it's quite possible that a certain
    perceived intemperance on his part is nothing but innate frustration
    resulting from semi-preceived possibilities available to less lingually-
    constrained individuals.

    --
    Neredbojias

    Scratched on wall of Tuscaloosa lockup #3:

    The woman was
    A real looker.
    Too bad she war'nt
    A real hooker.
     
    Neredbojias, Jul 8, 2007
    #14
  15. GreatArtist

    El Kabong Guest

    "Neredbojias" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns99674D3C6DD8Ananopandaneredbojias@198.186.190.161...
    > On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 13:01:32 GMT GreatArtist scribed:
    >
    >> On Jul 8, 1:30 am, John Hosking <>
    >> wrote:
    >>> You must be very proud.

    >>
    >> Why are you being a sarcastic jerk?
    >>
    >>> Pondering the value of the UIP:http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

    >>
    >> Regarding your link, I think the best thing to improve Usenet would be
    >> for people like you and Jerka Korpela to stop making sarcastic, rude,
    >> insulting comments that are unprovoked and stop being arrogant
    >> assholes. Learn how to be decent human beings.

    >
    > Here's something you should realize. Jukka has learned English as a
    > second
    > language, and being a very intelligent man, has done so very well. He
    > probably knows and uses it better than many native Brits, Yanks, and
    > particularly Australians. However, his primary vernacular, Finnish, is
    > more elemental in its constructs from being more primitive in development.
    > Having such a limited fundament naturally precludes the ability to access
    > many of the finer and sublime nuances of communication available in richer
    > languages - such as English. Ergo, it's quite possible that a certain
    > perceived intemperance on his part is nothing but innate frustration
    > resulting from semi-preceived possibilities available to less lingually-
    > constrained individuals.


    Or maybe he's just feeling inferior due to a perceived sexual inadequacy and
    is making feeble attempts at improving his low self-esteem by belittling
    others.

    El
     
    El Kabong, Jul 8, 2007
    #15
  16. Neredbojias wrote:
    > On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 13:01:32 GMT GreatArtist scribed:
    >
    >> On Jul 8, 1:30 am, John Hosking <>
    >> wrote:
    >>> You must be very proud.

    >>
    >> Why are you being a sarcastic jerk?
    >>
    >>> Pondering the value of the UIP:http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

    >>
    >> Regarding your link, I think the best thing to improve Usenet would be
    >> for people like you and Jerka Korpela to stop making sarcastic, rude,
    >> insulting comments that are unprovoked and stop being arrogant
    >> assholes. Learn how to be decent human beings.

    >
    > Here's something you should realize. Jukka has learned English as a second
    > language, and being a very intelligent man, has done so very well. He
    > probably knows and uses it better than many native Brits, Yanks, and
    > particularly Australians. However, his primary vernacular, Finnish, is
    > more elemental in its constructs from being more primitive in development.
    > Having such a limited fundament naturally precludes the ability to access
    > many of the finer and sublime nuances of communication available in richer
    > languages - such as English. Ergo, it's quite possible that a certain
    > perceived intemperance on his part is nothing but innate frustration
    > resulting from semi-preceived possibilities available to less lingually-
    > constrained individuals.


    You misspelled "You have nothing to teach anyone, Google Grouper." :)


    --
    Blinky RLU 297263
    Killing all posts from Google Groups
    The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
     
    Blinky the Shark, Jul 8, 2007
    #16
  17. GreatArtist <> writes:

    > I don't care what you think about XHTML. I didn't ask you!
    > Garrick Chow, who I respect far more than you, recommends XHTML 1.0
    > transitional.


    Your respect is misplaced. XHTML, while nice enough in theory, has any
    number of problems in practice that prevent it from being useful in the
    real world.

    I have far more respect for someone who has the backbone to tell it like
    it is, rather than pandering to the clueless masses in order to make more
    money from book sales.

    sherm--

    --
    Web Hosting by West Virginians, for West Virginians: http://wv-www.net
    Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
     
    Sherm Pendley, Jul 8, 2007
    #17
  18. Sherm Pendley wrote:
    > GreatArtist <> writes:
    >
    >> I don't care what you think about XHTML. I didn't ask you!
    >> Garrick Chow, who I respect far more than you, recommends XHTML 1.0
    >> transitional.

    >
    > Your respect is misplaced. XHTML, while nice enough in theory, has any
    > number of problems in practice that prevent it from being useful in the
    > real world.
    >
    > I have far more respect for someone who has the backbone to tell it like
    > it is, rather than pandering to the clueless masses in order to make more
    > money from book sales.


    Is there any reason to create a new site in transitional *anything*, as
    versus strict?


    --
    Blinky RLU 297263
    Killing all posts from Google Groups
    The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
     
    Blinky the Shark, Jul 8, 2007
    #18
  19. GreatArtist

    dorayme Guest

    In article
    <Xns99674D3C6DD8Ananopandaneredbojias@198.186.190.161>,
    Neredbojias <> wrote:

    > and particularly Australians.


    I can see that you lie bruised and vicious still about our little
    to and fro on the standards of stuffy old English grammar. (btw.
    wanna give me a teensy weensy little hint of your secret figure
    on the desert? You came up with a figure below 84,000 miles?)

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Jul 8, 2007
    #19
  20. GreatArtist

    dorayme Guest

    In article <VR5ki.188537$>,
    "Jukka K. Korpela" <> wrote:

    > Scripsit dorayme:
    >
    > > I supplied crucial info about title in
    > > anchors not being necessary.

    >
    > You didn't mention that they are of dubitable value, and besides, the issue
    > was title and alt attributes for <img>, not <a>.


    About anchors, I did not mention them in my first post and only
    in my second when I was remembering the first, must have been
    thinking of _one_ use for them in images.

    Which brings me to the subject of use. Sparingly, surely they can
    be wisely used as an extra but not essential aid. The practical
    reality is that not everyone is new to a page and it is very
    severe to require the page to be written on that assumption. Now
    and then a tooltip on on image or on an image as link can be a
    welcome addition to fill a gap in the harder task of making
    everything transparent.

    Why, I can think of an immediate use for one on just an image.
    Deny that the tooltip on the first pic at

    <http://tinyurl.com/ywvlg5>

    is mildly useful for those who see it!

    >
    > Moreover, you were not insulted by "GreatArtist", so you must have written
    > something wrong, or irony that was too difficult to understand to he/she/it.


    We must not get too cynical! There is a tendency in many ngs for
    some of the regulars to go in a little hard on newcomers. I see
    them being painted into corners, their dignity hurt and they
    behaving badly as do many of us when so treated.

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Jul 8, 2007
    #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. Andreas Klemt
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    490
    Steve C. Orr, MCSD
    Aug 10, 2003
  2. geradeaus

    newline in firefox alt / title

    geradeaus, Apr 14, 2005, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    17,159
    Jukka K. Korpela
    Apr 15, 2005
  3. Suzanne Knapp

    alt and title in <img> tag?

    Suzanne Knapp, Jul 4, 2005, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    698
    Blinky the Shark
    Jul 5, 2005
  4. entrepreneur

    Using ALT And TITLE Attributes

    entrepreneur, Oct 26, 2006, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    435
    Jukka K. Korpela
    Oct 28, 2006
  5. zig

    extend alt/title time?

    zig, Jan 31, 2004, in forum: Javascript
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    113
    Jim Ley
    Feb 1, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page