Discussion from bug 25537 seems to be something of a holy war but there appears to be some middle ground: http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/objects.html#adef-alt The standards do not say that ALT text cannot be displayed as a tooltip when TITLE is not available. It just says to display TITLE as a tooltip and not put meaningless information in ALT. There are many cases where a webmaster might want to do this, all discussed in bug 25537. This bug is not a dupe of bug 25537 and if you mark it a dupe, you didn't read this bug and seamonkeys will go to your house and flog you. The difference between this bug and bug 25537 is that this bug is about displaying ALT tooltips ONLY when TITLE is not available. One example of when this is helpful is: <img src="images/demoticons/icon_smile.gif" style="color: blue;" alt="::Smiles::" title="::Smiles::" > I want ::Smiles:: to appear for a graphic called icon_smile.gif when the image cannot be loaded. I also want a user to see ::Smiles:: when they mouseover in case they don't know what the image means. This is not necessary for a smiley emoticon because most people would know what it is. But for some other emoticons, it might help to have that titletip. I have to put an identical alt and title text, and in this case, it is appropriate. (This is why I decided to finally file a bug on this) http://www.w3.org/WAI/ "Non-text equivalents of text (e.g., icons, pre-recorded speech, or a video of a person translating the text into sign language) can make documents accessible to people who may have difficulty accessing written text, including many individuals with cognitive disabilities, learning disabilities, and deafness. Non-text equivalents of text can also be helpful to non-readers. An auditory description is an example of a non-text equivalent of visual information. An auditory description of a multimedia presentation's visual track benefits people who cannot see the visual information." This shows it is our responsibilty to display ALT text for accessibility reasons, which provides a long description of an image, with meaningful information. Yes, ALT text is meant as a replacement for an image if the image is not available, but there are cases (including accessibility reasons) why a user would need to see ALT text. Also, ALT text SHOULD be shown to make web authors realize its important to put it in. The question is how do we make them realize that ALT text is not something meant for putting the image title, which is for the TITLE attribute? --My suggestion-- Have the tooltip appear as follows ( [% %] represents an attribute): +--------------------+ | [%TITLE%]: [%ALT%] | +--------------------+ I got this idea on how Opera puts "Title: [%TITLE%]". When Title is not available (its not required): +---------+ | [%ALT%] | +---------+ What do we do when ALT text is not specified or is an empty string or series of spaces? We could show nothing, or we could put something like: "No description (ALT attribute) specified."
Created attachment 138392 [details] Test page Mozilla, Konqueror and Opera7 display no tooltips for ALT. Internet Explorer Win32 does, but will display TITLE instead if its available. I suggest (as mentioned above), for accessibility reasons, we display both TITLE and ALT in the same tooltip. The next attachment will show how 1,2,3, and 4 labelled on the web page should look.
Created attachment 138394 [details] How they should look 1. Display both ALT and TITLE 2. Display only ALT (no TITLE available) 3. Display only TITLE (no ALT available) -- naughty naughty 4. Show an error because neither are specified -- supernaughty We'll have to change that the tooltip goes away after about 5 seconds and make it so that it stays until the mouse moves again. Maybe we can make it so that if you move it while on the image, then it goes away until you leave the image and come back. IE does that. Maybe 4 should just say "Error!" or not appear.
If you want to see the ALT text because the image isn't good enough, turn off the images. Seriously. If the image isn't good enough for the user, exactly how likely is it that the user will be able to aim a pointer at the image then read the tooltip text that appears.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 15 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
It isn't that common that alt and title be identical, as alt should be read as part of the text when image is not displayed, while title's a supplemental information; btw your alt text should've been Smiles, not colon colon smiles colon etc. Alt doesn't provide a "long description of the image", it provides an alternate to the image, which indeed should not be that long. A long description is provided by longdesc ( http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/objects.html#adef-longdesc-IMG ). Advisory information about the image is provided by title. Actually the information you want is probably in the title. A person who's not able to understand the image should either disable image rendering or access alt in some other way, such as right click -> properties in mozilla; if it isn't capable of understand any image, it will disable the entire image rendering. Instances of the three properties, let's take the mozilla banner for instances: alt="mozilla home page" title="image linking to the mozilla home page" longdesc="the image represents the head of the red lizard on the left, then factories on the ground and the mozilla.org writing". Your last assertions are uncommentable without insulting. BTW all current browsers support title tooltips, many and many people have understood at least using title; why do you still want such things?
Its a matter of accessibility and a user shouldn't have to turn images off if he or she is colorblind, etc.
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Resolution: WONTFIX → ---
There is some Mozilla extension floating around which does what you ask for. I'd suggest using that rather than incorporating this into Mozilla proper. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 88297 ***
Status: REOPENED → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 15 years ago → 15 years ago
Resolution: --- → DUPLICATE
VERIFIED Oh well, at least I tried. Praying someday this will be reconsidered or that w3c will clarify their standards ;-)
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.