* Michael Carman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-06-07T23:13:02]
> On 6/7/2004 9:20 PM, Andy Lester wrote:
> >
> > The "ALT attribute as tooltip" thing isn't portable, though.
>
> I don't use ALT, I use TITLE. That's the "right way" according to the W3C and
> supported by at least IE and Mozilla-based b
On 6/7/2004 9:20 PM, Andy Lester wrote:
>
> The "ALT attribute as tooltip" thing isn't portable, though.
I don't use ALT, I use TITLE. That's the "right way" according to the W3C and
supported by at least IE and Mozilla-based browsers. Or did you mean something
else by "isn't portable?"
-mjc
When you hover the mouse over one of the percentages, you get a little
pop-up
that gives the numbers used to calculate the percentage. ("Tooltip"
probably
isn't the right name for this situation, but that's what I'm used to
calling them.)
The "ALT attribute as tooltip" thing isn't portable, thou
On 6/7/2004 11:26 AM, Geoffrey Young wrote:
>
>> The only thing I don't like about this approach is that some of the data is
>> available only in the tooltips, which of course don't print.
>
> sorry I need this kind of explanation, but what are the tooltips?
When you hover the mouse over one of
> Before I get too deep into an implementation, I'd like to poll the group about
> how you would use this feature and like it to behave. My thoughts and plans follow.
>
> For the coverage summary, the numbers represent actual coverage, but the colors
> are based upon actual coverage + analysis. S
On 5/27/2004 9:31 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Fri, May 21, 2004 at 12:50:55PM -0400, Geoffrey Young wrote:
>>
>> if [a missed path] represents a condition we would explain away (D::C
>> limitation, or whatnot) then it would be nice to have some way to track it
>> within the tool itself.
>
> It
