Paul,
on Wednesday, January 4, 2006 at 17:35 wsg@webstandardsgroup.org wrote:
You can't use the :hover pseudo class on any element other than an
anchor in IE unfortunately. I don't have time to look too far, but
with a brief search I found this link that mentions it:
rollover
graphics!
Paul
- Original Message -
From:
Martin
Heiden
To: Paul Collins
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 4:07
PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Images as DIV
Background with and without link (w3c friendly)
Paul,on Wednesday, January 4, 2006 at 15:48 wsg
Hi Fausto,
A good way of doing it, but It doesn't work with
Images off and CSS still turned on, which becomes
an Accessibility issue. Has anyone ever resolved a way ofdoing this for
graphic links containing a rollover state? The problem is, IE doesn't let you
add a hover state to anything
Fausto Balloni wrote:
It also helps Google and other search engines to find the name,
title or alt of the image.
Somehow I don't think Google and co. have any trouble finding the ALT
attribute on images already...
--
Patrick H. Lauke
Hi Fausto,
To cut things short:
there is nothing wrong with images used as background via CSS as long
as theses images are used as layout and not to give meaningful pieces
of information to the visitors.
You may end up confusing people who use text-only or speech devices.
Read this article
Paul,
on Wednesday, January 4, 2006 at 15:48 wsg@webstandardsgroup.org wrote:
I thought the Gilder/Levin/Shea Enhancement Method was best, but
you can't have a hover state on a graphic link using this.
Example HTML would be:
a id=header title=Revised Image Replacement
2006
12:48To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG]
Images as DIV Background with and without link (w3c
friendly)
Hi Fausto,
A good way of doing it, but It doesn't work with
Images off and CSS still turned on, which
becomes an Accessibility issue. Has anyone ever
:
Martin
Heiden
To: Paul Collins
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 4:07
PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Images as DIV
Background with and without link (w3c friendly)
Paul,on Wednesday, January 4, 2006 at 15:48 wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
wrote: I thought the Gilder/Levin/Shea Enhancement
