- Feature Articles
- CodeSOD
- Error'd
-
Forums
-
Other Articles
- Random Article
- Alex's Soapbox
- Announcements
- Best of…
- Best of Email
- Best of the Sidebar
- Bring Your Own Code
- Coded Smorgasbord
- Mandatory Fun Day
- Off Topic
- Representative Line
- News Roundup
- Editor's Soapbox
- Software on the Rocks
- Souvenir Potpourri
- Sponsor Post
- Tales from the Interview
- The Daily WTF: Live
- Virtudyne
Admin
That last one is for screen readers for visually disabled people.
Admin
In all fairness, help text on images is very useful for accessibility. Just saying. Screen-reader software can then read stuff out loud that people can't see or read themselves. Few sites or apps do it justice, and I'm inclined to give kudo's to the crowd that have it as part of their design standard.
Admin
The last one is making a great effort at accessibility. (Unlike JIRA - I recently learned that their issue editor interface is not compatible with screen readers).
Admin
About the mouseover. There are accessibility guidelines for this: https://wcag.com/authors/1-1-1-non-text-content/
Admin
Perhaps. It's just a shame that it fails utterly at providing actual useful information.
Admin
I may be showing off how clueless I am about both accessibility and front-end design, and certainly I am clueless in both spaces. But (A) isn't alt text, rather than title, the important attribute for accessibility, and haven't browsers generally stopped displaying alt text as a tooltip? And (B) the image isn't there just to be a picture of a minus icon. It's an active user interface element. Shouldn't its accessibility text describe its actual purpose, e.g. "collapse section button"?
Admin
Helpful alt text for images, or text alternatives in other contexts (like an aria label on an icon only button) are indeed a godsend for screenreader users.
But even if we put aside that the text isn't actually very use here, this seems like someone thinking they have to "do accessibility" while actually not having a clue. Tooltips that you have to hover over are already completely inaccessible to screenreader users (and keyboard users too, without extra effort), so this won't help.
Admin
Did nobody else think "Shouldn't that be 'mouseoverer'?"?
Admin
At least all the (PERCENT) add up to 100.
Admin
Is it really "diligent mouserover Rick P." or should it be "diligent mouseroverer Rick P."? Now I have this to ponder all day....
Admin
And at least the alleged winner was actually ahead. Dewey has entered the chat
Admin
I wouldn't call the last one a WTF. It's the alternate text (which exists for good reason) that somehow ended up as a tooltip, probably because of something automated that had no mouseover text and thus used the alternate text.
Admin
IIRC, a page identifying itself as html 4 does not pass the official W3C (or whatever they’re calling themselves now) validator unless every image has alt text.
Admin
But decorative or layout images should have empty alt text. Alt text should describe the content of the image. and this one is content-free. The last one is definitely a WTF.
Admin
none of the above.
he is a presumably wild rover, and a mouseover-er.
thus, the totally correct total title must simply be: "raving mad mouseovererroverer".
Or have I put one, er, "er" too many? Maybe I'm a mouseovererroveroverachiever.
Admin
As a practitioner of UX in general and accessibility in particular, I'll note that this is absolutely correct. The point of alternative text is to be a text alternative for a graphical element, so it needs to serve the same functional purpose.
Admin
If you specify NO_PICKLES and EXTRA_PICKLES at the same time, you get 2÷0 pickles.
Admin
Not sure if it's great effort, since it ignores the meaning of the sign. I think something like 'bullet point' would be better here. But it's effort nonetheless and as such much appreciated.