Images alt vs title 4

[1DMF]

I know people say that images do not hold much weight to search engines, however google specificaly have an image inclusion option in the web master tools section.

So with this is mind, is it important to add title attributes to images, obviously alt is a standards requirement, but I have noticed IE will display alt attribute text as a tool tip on hover, where as FireFox & Opera will only display a tooltip on images if a title attribute is used.

so should the smame text in the alt be added to image tags in the title?

does it make a difference, which attribute does google use to identify the relevance of an image to the search alt or title or both?

regards, 1DMF.


"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.

 

[Foamcow]

So with this is mind, is it important to add title attributes to images, obviously alt is a standards requirement,

No it isn't.
alt attributes are required on images, titles aren't.

IE displays the alt attribute as a 'tooltip' if there is no title. If you want to stop IE doing this then put a blank title attribute in the image tag. If you have a non empty title attribute then *all* browsers will use this to display a tooltip.

Titles apparantly are ignored, or at least little notice is taken of them. I believe Alts are treated as regular text.


<honk>*:O)</honk>
Designease Ltd. - polyprop folders, ring binders and creative presentation ideas
Earl & Thompson Marketing - Marketing Agency Services in Gloucestershire

 

[feherke]

Hi

[tt]alt[/tt] - alternative content instead of the proper information of the image ( what a blind can not see on the image )
[tt]title[/tt] - additional information beside the proper information of the image ( what neither other people can see on image )

So the textual description of what the image shows, should be in the [tt]alt[/tt] attribute.

<alt src="conference.jpg" alt="group photo of the open source conference participants" title="first meating day, during the web presentation">

Some people say, the [tt]title[/tt] attribute should contain the instructions like "click here", but I do not like it.

Feherke.

http://rootshell.be/~feherke/

 

[1DMF]

thanks, if you thought it would make 0.000001% difference i'd add title tags but if you say only alt tags count then there is no point, even if IE decides it likes them as tooltip text!

"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.

 

[feherke]

Hi

And personally I think everything you would write in the [tt]title[/tt] attribute, should be written as plain content. In my above example too, that [tt]title[/tt] text would look better under the image.

Feherke.

http://rootshell.be/~feherke/

 

[ChrisHunt]

As always, you should concentrate on the user experience. If you think it will be useful for people to have additional information about an image displayed when you hover over it, do it.

I tend only to give values to [tt]alt[/tt] attributes when a useful alternative can be given. If you can't see that group photo of conference participants it's not a lot of use knowing it's there, so I'd mark up feherke's example with an [tt]alt=""[/tt] instead.

-- Chris Hunt
Webmaster & Tragedian
Extra Connections Ltd

 

[1DMF]

Seems odd the standards requiring an attribute if the general rule is to leave it blank.

Getting the right balance is definately a juggling act.

"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.

 

[audiopro]

I assume standards insist on an alt attribute for consistency in screen readers. The inclusion or exclusion of a value would then depend on relevance. There is little point in describing an image to a blind person if it serves no real purpose. If, on the other hand, the image contains a link, then an explanation of what the link is, would be essential.


Keith

http://www.studiosoft.co.uk

 

[Foamcow]

The 'general rule' is not to leave it blank.
However sometimes it is more appropriate to leave it blank if the image isn't 'content' as such (i.e. it's decoration, or heaven forbid, a spacer)

<honk>*:O)</honk>
Designease Ltd. - polyprop folders, ring binders and creative presentation ideas
Earl & Thompson Marketing - Marketing Agency Services in Gloucestershire

 

[feherke]

Hi

I tend only to give values to alt attributes when a useful alternative can be given.

Happened to me to want to show an image to someone. The image was stored on a slow server and was part of a bulk image list, the owner called "gallery". But many images was on one page in full size. To not wait several minutes for full page load, I turned off images from the browser, then tried to load the wanted one, just dimly remembering its position on the page. Then I really wished to see [tt]alt[/tt] texts describing each photo.

I think a photo is content, not decoration. And I put [tt]alt=""[/tt] only for decorations.

Feherke.

http://rootshell.be/~feherke/

 

[1DMF]

thanks for all your input peeps!

"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.