____/ Hymer on Sunday 15 July 2007 00:40 : \____
>
>>>> So it is Title vs. Alt.
>>>
>>> "Big Bill" suggested:
>>>> Alt wins.
>>>
>>> "Roy Schestowitz" commented:
>>> : I'd say alt as well, based on what I'm seeing in terms of return
>>> : (referrals). It's more of an instinctive opinion though.
>>>
>>> For images I don't think there's any penalty for putting both a
>>> title
>>> and an alt on an image. The alt="" was created for people with
>>> vision problems so if they couldn't see the picture, they'd get a
>>> description of what the picture was.
>>>
>>> For all other things, title wins, as there is no alt. And the
>>> advantage
>>> of the title is that for all web-browsers, when someone scrolls
>>> their
>>> mouse over the item, a pop up tooltip window appears with the
>>> "title"
>>> in it. So it's a valid way to provide user feedback. The only
>>> problem
>>> is if you've got a table with a title that holds an image with a
>>> title, it's
>>> not defined which title gets displayed, so either check out how the
>>> title works in such nested instances.
>>
>> I suppose that having both wouldn't hurt. In some cases, alt is
>> required
>> for /validation.
>
>
> Hi Roy,
>
> I validate OK because I do have alts with every actual image. But I
> have a lot of Titles for navigation links, etc. I think I'll leave the
> titles alone out of fear of getting hit for spamming. I don't want to
> jeopardize the good SERPs I already have.
>
> So I am going to leave well enough alone.
In the past I was actually using both, one for tooltips (where the browser
actually cares for it, usually to indicate that the pitcure was royalty-free)
and one for validation/accessibility/indexing/search inside the CMS.
It's easy to be lazy and never name or label things properly. I does, on the
other hand, have long-term benefits.
--
~~ Best of wishes
Roy S. Schestowitz | http://debian.org
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU is Not UNIX | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine
|
|
