Travis and all,
This is my bad. I should have said but didn't know "vo and the title
attribute on the web" as the subject. Before I saw the code, I was
under the mistaken impression that it was the alt that was
offending. When I first brought this to the attention of the web
manager, they were a bit confused too. I wrote a second message
trying to streighten out the confusion and got a message back about
the "tooltip". Once Access k provided the link to the code and I
took a look at it, I saw three things going on. There is an Icon
with the alt of "energy icon". There is a title "energy assistance"
and there is the link its self which boasts "energy" as the text in
the hreff.
Bottom line, Access C is right. If you are looking at something and
want to ask a question, it's best to describe the functionality
unless you first examine the code. If you send a message describing
behaviour and use the rong terms, people willl most likely be confused.
My final message to date described the issue and provided potentially
corrective code.
I still need to try this with firefox.
Thanks!
On Jun 3, 2006, at 5:29 PM, Travis Siegel wrote:
But asking a webmaster to fix an alt tag on a link won't confuse the
webmaster at all if he/she is any good at all at their job. They'll
understand the alt tag is for the image that goes with the link.
Where's the problem with that? Haven't you ever had someone tell you
their computer has 20GB of memory? Of course they don't mean it has
20GB of RAM, they mean it has a 20GB hd. Anyone who knows the
slightest thing about computers knows this. Same thing with web
masters, any webmaster that has a clue about what they've created
will know what I meant. Yes, it was mistyped, but nonetheless, it
will get the point across.
