Boulder - I am sure you are going to hear from all side on this one lol
In facts - this is not "wrong" to do. In reality if it looks stuffed, then it is keyword stuffing and it is wrong to do.
Now you decide ;)
the alt attribute is more important as it provides alternate content for user agents or visitors that cannot utilize images while the title attribute is meant as advisory information and is not measured by the algos.
this WebmasterWorld thread pretty much covers the issues - pay special attention to the last two replies:
img alt="" or title"" or both? [webmasterworld.com]
Title could become relevant in the future though.
Just two cents from the edge, I think that is a great alt tag OR title, I can almost see the puffy cotton ball clouds over a cobalt blue sky with razor sharp peaks in the distance and wish I was there. This is what alts are supposed to do . . . . not . . .
Grand Teton Rocky Mountains Utah mountain climbing lake resort boating fishing ski resort national park boating tours fishing excursions landscape photography . . . .
hahha thanks Rocknbil. That was my goal so that disabled users could have the scene described to them. But in case title tags have a place in the future, I wanted to have both bases covered.
I will check out that link ASAP. Thanks.
[edited by: Boulder90 at 9:54 pm (utc) on Feb. 14, 2009]
Unless I am wrong, as per your link, the last two or other posts do not address the dupe usage?
I started to do the same quite a while ago
Is there anything against using a fine and dandy description twice?
|alt : Defines a short description of the image |
title : Specifies extra information about an element
A strict interpretation would therefore be that the title, if used, should convey information that is not included in the image, such as when it was taken.
It's worth noting that the title attribute applies to all visible elements, not just images. Would you duplicate the text of a <p> in its title attribute - I don't think so.
Title tags on all p elements :( I should live so long ;)
I had always thought it shold be something like this..
<img alt="Detail of Picasso's Le Moulin de la Galette from Thannhauser Collection, Guggenheim Museum" title="Le Moulin de la Galette, Pablo Picasso" src="/images/img20090101.jpg" />
<img alt="The sheer face of Half Dome framed by snow and winter skies" title="Monolith, 1946 by Ansel Adams" src="/images/img20080101.jpg" />
Titles are, well, titles. Alt text is, alternative text describing the image when it is not viewable in the browser.
here are some authoritative sources on the subject.
How to specify alternate text [w3.org]
The title attribute [w3.org]
W3C quality assurance tips for webmasters:
Use the alt attribute to describe the function of each visual [w3.org]
W3C Techniques for "WAI Guidelines: Page Authoring":
Alternative text and descriptions [w3.org]
Images and image maps [w3.org]
(note especially: Brief descriptions for images [w3.org])
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0:
Provide equivalent alternatives to auditory and visual content [w3.org]
W3C HTML Techniques for WCAG 2.0:
H37: Using alt attributes on img elements ¦ Techniques for WCAG 2.0 [w3.org]
H89: Using the title attribute to provide context-sensitive help ¦ Techniques for WCAG 2.0 [w3.org]
What is meant by a text equivalent? [access-board.gov]
google webmaster central blog:
the difference between the "alt" and "title" attributes [googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com]
|As the Googlebot does not see the images directly, we generally concentrate on the information provided in the "alt" attribute. Feel free to supplement the "alt" attribute with "title" and other attributes if they provide value to your users! |