Alt text?

Comment 1

Oh that's just hilarious. Good catch, but I think you have way too much spare time on your hands! :-)

So said Jonathan M. Hollin on Thursday 23 December, 2004 at 1:33PM GMT.

Comment 2

I think they're using it for the tooltip

So said Chris on Thursday 23 December, 2004 at 1:37PM GMT.

Comment 3

"I think they're using it for the tooltip" - well they shouldn't be :) That's what title is for...

So said Tim on Thursday 23 December, 2004 at 2:13PM GMT.

Comment 4

*Blushes* - Guilty as charged but that has something to do with the limitations of my CMS. Maybe a I shoud write something up!

So said John Oxton on Thursday 23 December, 2004 at 2:16PM GMT.

Comment 5

Dont know if you have seen this document but its interesting. It's basicly the why's and hows of the BBC website.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/webdev/

So said Tom on Thursday 23 December, 2004 at 7:09PM GMT.

Comment 6

Yep, alt is what you want instead of the image, not in addition to the image.

Softball, Pat. Throw it harder.

So said Neal on Friday 24 December, 2004 at 4:21AM GMT.

Comment 7

http://annevankesteren.nl/archives/2004/12/alt-attribute

Anne mentions this topic.

So said Matthom on Friday 24 December, 2004 at 2:54PM GMT.

Comment 8

Which is why everyone should read over their sites in Lynx (http://lynx.browser.org/) to see if their alts make sense. Curse Microsoft for implementing alts as tooltips and confusing millions!

So said Desi Quintans on Monday 27 December, 2004 at 3:46AM GMT.

Comment 9

five problems with that element as used....

1. alt text should be offered as a replacement for the image...its text seems too descriptive
2. title tag is missing, and yes, IE (and some others) do use alt for both alt and tooltips
3. closing hash required in img tag...unless that page is conforming to HTML
4. use of the term (left) seems to be funny as its implying someone can see the image and know to pick out the person to the left
5. Maybe Im making a bad assumption here, but could it be that the image path is using an absolute url because its "ripping" it off another web site? Someone could make a case for copyright infringement and take the owner of that site to court, if thats the case.....not good :o(

...funny how something so simple as an innocent ol' image element can turn out so complicated, huh?

www.stormdetector.com

So said Mitchell on Tuesday 28 December, 2004 at 8:35AM GMT.

Comment 10

because BBC stores all its from root, so it has to go to a different sub domain to get its images

So said SteveC on Tuesday 28 December, 2004 at 11:44AM GMT.

Comment 11

BBC webhosting is a mess anyway, the design is just as bad imho...

So said arnie on Wednesday 2 February, 2005 at 8:37PM GMT.