Is there any way to force the text block that pops up for an image to
have a longer display time?

I have an imagemap with lots of areas that contain specific "ALT="
text to help identify the portion of the image the cursor is hovering
over. In some cases, a lot of text is displayed but the text block
disappears too quickly to allow you to read the whole thing. I just
wondered if there was a way to specify that the block remain on the
screen until the cursor moves away from that portion of the image?

Or is there a better way to do this?

Sandy

Sandy wrote:
> Is there any way to force the text block that pops up for an image to
> have a longer display time?

No.


> I have an imagemap with lots of areas that contain specific "ALT="
> text to help identify the portion of the image the cursor is hovering
> over. In some cases, a lot of text is displayed but the text block
> disappears too quickly to allow you to read the whole thing. I just
> wondered if there was a way to specify that the block remain on the
> screen until the cursor moves away from that portion of the image?
>
> Or is there a better way to do this?

The TITLE attribute, perhaps. Or don't use an imagemap that is not
self-explanatory enough.


Matthias

Sandy wrote:
> Is there any way to force the text block that pops up for an image to
> have a longer display time?

http://www.vortex-webdesign.com/help/faq.htm#force

> I have an imagemap with lots of areas that contain specific "ALT="
> text to help identify the portion of the image the cursor is hovering
> over.

Alternative text is just that: alternative text. A couple of obsolete
browsers misuse it for tooltips, but it should only be used as an
alternative to the image if it can't be displayed for some reason. The
title attribute is what you should be using.

> In some cases, a lot of text is displayed but the text block
> disappears too quickly to allow you to read the whole thing. I just
> wondered if there was a way to specify that the block remain on the
> screen until the cursor moves away from that portion of the image?

You could try using some kind of JavaScript solution in addition to
using the title attribute, but never rely on any kind of tooltip working.

Quoth the raven Sandy:

> I have an imagemap with lots of areas that contain specific "ALT="
> text to help identify the portion of the image the cursor is
> hovering over.

You must be using a broken browser then. Alt text is not for hover
display, that is what the title attribute is for. In my browser of
choice, your alt text would not be displayed.

> Or is there a better way to do this?

<img src="..."
alt="<Display this when images turned off>"
title="I want you to read all this text when you hover ..."
...

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.

Sandy <news:hqi7n0tv568dd33p926g2kmm4fc123obn3 [at] 4ax.com>:

> Is there any way to force the text block that pops up for an
> image to have a longer display time?

If you are referring to the alt or title attribute being
displayed graphically then you would have to rewrite the code of
the browser in question. Or disable images so you can see the
alternative text.

> I have an imagemap with lots of areas that contain specific
> "ALT=" text to help identify the portion of the image the
> cursor is hovering over. [...]
> Or is there a better way to do this?

Perhaps if your images aren't easy enough to figure out where I
might go you would be better served with different images and/or
actual text.

Another option would be to look into some DHTML method to display
the extra text when the browser supports such things.

--
Rob McAninch
http://rock13.com Perl Programming and
Web Stuff: http://rock13.com/webhelp

In alt.html Sandy said:

> Is there any way to force

http://webtips.dan.info/force.html

> the text block that pops up for an image to have a longer display
> time?

use a browser other than IE where the tooltip remains visible until the
mouse moves.

> I have an imagemap

usability/accessibility issues. you probably shouldn't be using it

> with lots of areas that contain specific "ALT="
> text to help identify the portion of the image the cursor

your design is broken if it needs tooltips to "help"

> is hovering over.

'alt' is not meant to display a 'tooltip'. the 'title' attribute usually
does.

alt = text [CS]
For user agents that cannot display images, forms, or applets, this
attribute specifies alternate text. The language of the alternate text
is specified by the lang attribute.
http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/objects.html#adef-alt

title = text [CS]
This attribute offers advisory information about the element for which
it is set.[...]
Values of the title attribute may be rendered by user agents in a
variety of ways. For instance, visual browsers frequently display the
title as a "tool tip" (a short message that appears when the pointing
device pauses over an object). Audio user agents may speak the title
information in a similar context. For example, setting the attribute on
a link allows user agents (visual and non-visual) to tell users about
the nature of the linked resource:
http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/global.html#adef-title

The "tooltip" effect and the title attribute
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/html/alt.html#tooltip

> In some cases, a lot of text is displayed but the text block
> disappears too quickly to allow you to read the whole thing.

you've got yourself stuck on a particular course of action. give it up.
the solution is to redesign your broken design.


--


v o i c e s

Leif K-Brooks <eurleif [at] ecritters.biz> wrote in news:2ti3ooF202ndvU1 [at] uni-
berlin.de:

> Alternative text is just that: alternative text. A couple of obsolete
> browsers misuse it for tooltips, but it should only be used as an
> alternative to the image if it can't be displayed for some reason.

Why only then?

Sam Hughes <hughes [at] rpi.edu> wrote:

>> Alternative text is just that: alternative text. A couple of obsolete
>> browsers misuse it for tooltips, but it should only be used as an
>> alternative to the image if it can't be displayed for some reason.
>
> Why only then?

What do you think "alternative" (or "alternate") means?

--
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Pages about Web authoring: http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/www.html

In alt.html Jukka K. Korpela said:

> What do you think "alternative" (or "alternate") means?

· unemployed.
· grow/sell/smoke drugs.
· fear of soap and water.
· delude yourself into thinking you can play bongo drums and in public.
· lots of body decorations/mutilations especially from african origins.
· grow dreadlocks and have small creatures living in them.

--


v o i c e s

"Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela [at] cs.tut.fi> wrote in
news:Xns9587B9CEC360jkorpelacstutfi [at] 193.229.0.31:

> Sam Hughes <hughes [at] rpi.edu> wrote:
>
>>> Alternative text is just that: alternative text. A couple of obsolete
>>> browsers misuse it for tooltips, but it should only be used as an
>>> alternative to the image if it can't be displayed for some reason.
>>
>> Why only then?
>
> What do you think "alternative" (or "alternate") means?

But why _only_ then should a browser reveal the alternate text? If a
reader who sees an image wants to know what the image's alternate text is,
there is no reason to stop him.

On 19 Oct 2004 01:15:43 GMT, Sam Hughes <hughes [at] rpi.edu> declared in
alt.html:

> But why _only_ then should a browser reveal the alternate text?

Because it is an *alternative*. You render the image, or alternately,
the text.

> If a
> reader who sees an image wants to know what the image's alternate text is,
> there is no reason to stop him.

If you mean stop him (or her ;-) ) looking at the page source, of course
not. In Mozilla, if you right click an image and view its properties, it
tells you the alt text. I don't see a problem with that. But the text
should not be shown on the page in addition to the image, including as a
tooltip.

--
Mark Parnell
http://www.clarkecomputers.com.au
"Never drink rum&coke whilst reading usenet" - rf 2004

On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 14:55:22 GMT, "Beauregard T. Shagnasty"
<a.nony.mous [at] example.invalid> wrote:

>Quoth the raven Sandy:
>
>> I have an imagemap with lots of areas that contain specific "ALT="
>> text to help identify the portion of the image the cursor is
>> hovering over.
>
>You must be using a broken browser then. Alt text is not for hover
>display, that is what the title attribute is for. In my browser of
>choice, your alt text would not be displayed.
>
>> Or is there a better way to do this?
>
><img src="..."
> alt="<Display this when images turned off>"
> title="I want you to read all this text when you hover ..."
> ...

I'm using IE6 and only the ALT tag will display all the text. If I
stick it in the TITLE, only the first line is displayed. That isn't
acceptable for my purposes.

Sandy

On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 06:19:46 +1000, brucie <shit [at] usenetshit.info>
wrote:
>
>> In some cases, a lot of text is displayed but the text block
>> disappears too quickly to allow you to read the whole thing.
>
>you've got yourself stuck on a particular course of action. give it up.
>the solution is to redesign your broken design.

I don't have a broken design. What I have are limitations on what I
want to appear. :) My image is a map which I want to enhance with
commentary. I want the user to be able to see the whole map and when
the mouse hovers over a position on the map, they can see the
commentary about that particular site. I could use a graphics program
to stick little boxes all over the place with the appropriate text,
but then the map would be too cluttered. The popup tooltips seem like
the ideal solution. I tried putting the text in the TITLE but only
the first line displays. Only the ALT text will display everything
albeit for a short time. Javascript could put the text in the status
bar but that is kind of awkward.

Sandy

Sandy

> On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 14:55:22 GMT, "Beauregard T. Shagnasty"
> <a.nony.mous [at] example.invalid> wrote:

> ><img src="..."
> > alt="<Display this when images turned off>"
> > title="I want you to read all this text when you hover ..."
> > ...
>
> I'm using IE6 and only the ALT tag

Attribute. It is an alt attribute.

> will display all the text. If I
> stick it in the TITLE, only the first line is displayed.

Er, what?

The title attribute will be displayed on however many lines it takes to fit
it all in.

--
Cheers
Richard.

In alt.html Sandy said:

> I'm using IE6

no one cares what you use. its what your visitors uses that matters.

> and only the ALT tag will display all the text.

it behavior is the same as title

> If I stick it in the TITLE, only the first line is displayed.

IE6 will display title text until there is so much it can no longer fit
within the browser window. at full screen 800x600 thats almost 3k of
text.

> That isn't acceptable for my purposes.

your design is broken. dump it and start again or just continue wasting
your time.


--


v o i c e s

Mark Parnell <webmaster [at] clarkecomputers.com.au> wrote in
news:198bk9yl7g8x5.13wemtdtlwzby$.dlg [at] 40tude.net:

> On 19 Oct 2004 01:15:43 GMT, Sam Hughes <hughes [at] rpi.edu> declared in
> alt.html:
>
>> But why _only_ then should a browser reveal the alternate text?
>
> Because it is an *alternative*. You render the image, or alternately,
> the text.

Your logic seems to be as follows:
1. Alt text must be rendered if the image is not rendered.
2. ???
3. Therefore, if the image is rendered, the contents of the alt text should
not be made available to the user.

Please fill in the "???".

>> If a reader who sees an image wants to know what the image's alternate
>> text is, there is no reason to stop him.
>
> [...] But the text should not be shown on the page in addition to the
> image, including as a tooltip.

Why not?

In alt.html Sandy said:

> >you've got yourself stuck on a particular course of action. give it up.
> >the solution is to redesign your broken design.

> I don't have a broken design.

yes you do. rethink what you're trying to achieve and start again.

> What I have are limitations

you can waste your time if you like but don't waste mine.


--


v o i c e s

On 19 Oct 2004 02:16:52 GMT, Sam Hughes <hughes [at] rpi.edu> declared in
alt.html:
> Mark Parnell <webmaster [at] clarkecomputers.com.au> wrote in
> news:198bk9yl7g8x5.13wemtdtlwzby$.dlg [at] 40tude.net:
>> [...] But the text should not be shown on the page in addition to the
>> image, including as a tooltip.
>
> Why not?

Because it's an *alternative*.

al·ter·na·tive (n.)

1. a. The choice between two mutually exclusive possibilities.
b. A situation presenting such a choice.
c. Either of these possibilities.

Note: *mutually exclusive*. That means if you have one, you cannot have
the other. That is what an alternative is.

--
Mark Parnell
http://www.clarkecomputers.com.au
"Never drink rum&coke whilst reading usenet" - rf 2004

brucie wrote:
> In alt.html Jukka K. Korpela said:
>
>> What do you think "alternative" (or "alternate") means?
>
> · unemployed.
> · grow/sell/smoke drugs.
> · fear of soap and water.
> · delude yourself into thinking you can play bongo drums and in
> public. · lots of body decorations/mutilations especially from
> african origins. · grow dreadlocks and have small creatures living in
> them.

speaking of which, i recently went to the mullimbimbi markets with the wife
and kids. that was interesting.

Sam Hughes wrote:
> But why _only_ then should a browser reveal the alternate text? If a
> reader who sees an image wants to know what the image's alternate text
> is, there is no reason to stop him.

Perhaps we could add another attribute, "comp", which would display
it's value as a caption to the image?

--
frostie
http://brightonfixedodds.net

Sandy wrote:


> I don't have a broken design. What I have are limitations on what I
> want to appear. :) My image is a map which I want to enhance with
> commentary. I want the user to be able to see the whole map and when
> the mouse hovers over a position on the map, they can see the
> commentary about that particular site.
[...]

You could probably do something with brucie's butterflies,
http://www.porjes.com/butterflies/index.php

Slice the map up in to separate images and then as the users click their
way around the relevant text pops up with any further links required
included.

--
frostie
http://brightonfixedodds.net

In alt.html Robert Frost-Bridges said:

> http://www.porjes.com/butterflies/index.php

yuck!

http://butterflies.usenetshit.info/

--


v o i c e s

brucie wrote:

> In alt.html Robert Frost-Bridges said:
>
>> http://www.porjes.com/butterflies/index.php
>
> yuck!
>
> http://butterflies.usenetshit.info/
>

Yeah, that's better. GoogleGroups gave me the one I posted, I think the
op could make something of this.

--
frostie
http://brightonfixedodds.net

On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 02:09:31 GMT, "rf" <rf [at] .invalid> wrote:

>Attribute. It is an alt attribute.

thank you for the clarification

>> will display all the text. If I
>> stick it in the TITLE, only the first line is displayed.
>
>Er, what?
>
>The title attribute will be displayed on however many lines it takes to fit
>it all in.

I wouldn't have written that only one line is displayed if it didn't
happen that way.

Sandy

On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 12:12:45 +1000, brucie <shit [at] usenetshit.info>
wrote:

>In alt.html Sandy said:
>
>> I'm using IE6
>
>no one cares what you use. its what your visitors uses that matters.

Uhm, excuse me, but there is going to be at least a certain percentage
that uses IE6 and if it isn't working for me, then it isn't going to
be working for them. Right?

>
>> and only the ALT tag will display all the text.
>
>it behavior is the same as title
>
>> If I stick it in the TITLE, only the first line is displayed.
>
>IE6 will display title text until there is so much it can no longer fit
>within the browser window. at full screen 800x600 thats almost 3k of
>text.

Didn't happen that way for me....only the first line
displayed....that's why I posted my message that way.

>
>> That isn't acceptable for my purposes.
>
>your design is broken. dump it and start again or just continue wasting
>your time.

You haven't seen my 'design', so how can you say it is broken? It
could just be that HTML doesn't provide me with the tools I really
need.

Sandy

On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 09:57:54 +0000, Robert Frost-Bridges
<web [at] brightonfixedodds.net> wrote:

>> commentary. I want the user to be able to see the whole map and when
>> the mouse hovers over a position on the map, they can see the
>> commentary about that particular site.
> [...]
>
>You could probably do something with brucie's butterflies,
>http://www.porjes.com/butterflies/index.php
>
>Slice the map up in to separate images and then as the users click their
>way around the relevant text pops up with any further links required
>included.

Actually, I already have that. You've probably misread what my
problem is. I am already trying to display relevant text in the pop
up -- which it does. What it doesn't do, is remain on the screen long
enough to read ALL of the relevant text.

Thank you for your suggestion, though.
Sandy

On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 14:12:08 GMT, Sandy <barbarowa [at] yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 02:09:31 GMT, "rf" <rf [at] .invalid> wrote:
>> The title attribute will be displayed on however many lines it takes to
>> fit
>> it all in.
>
> I wouldn't have written that only one line is displayed if it didn't
> happen that way.

The problem is that rf is right, that's how it's supposed to work. If it
doesn't, that's an issue.

Check out http://users.rcn.com/neal413/titletest.html and describe what
you see as a tooltip on each drawing of me in a hat.

For me:

alt and title set - IE6 and Opera, full title displayed; Firefox,
truncated title and I can find no simple way to correct this. :0\

alt, no title - IE6 displays alt in tooltip, nothing in Opera or Firefox

title, no alt - same as title and alt set. :0\

Robert Frost-Bridges wrote:
> Sam Hughes wrote:
>
>>But why _only_ then should a browser reveal the alternate text? If a
>>reader who sees an image wants to know what the image's alternate text
>>is, there is no reason to stop him.
>
> Perhaps we could add another attribute, "comp", which would display
> it's value as a caption to the image?

Wouldn't work for image maps, which is what the OP's talking about. For
other images, what's wrong with adding a caption with ordinary CSS?

Sandy wrote:
> It
> could just be that HTML doesn't provide me with the tools I really
> need.

Sounds to me like you're trying to do something HTML was never designed
to do. If you're trying to imitate a desktop application in a browser,
start over with a genuine desktop application (hopefully for an intranet
only); if not, your design is broken.

Mark Parnell <webmaster [at] clarkecomputers.com.au> wrote in
news:fi6ylfdpurmm.js9o4zyx7gek$.dlg [at] 40tude.net:

> On 19 Oct 2004 02:16:52 GMT, Sam Hughes <hughes [at] rpi.edu> declared in
> alt.html:
>> Mark Parnell <webmaster [at] clarkecomputers.com.au> wrote in
>> news:198bk9yl7g8x5.13wemtdtlwzby$.dlg [at] 40tude.net:
>>> [...] But the text should not be shown on the page in addition to the
>>> image, including as a tooltip.
>>
>> Why not?
>
> Because it's an *alternative*.

But you see, the only reason it's an alternative is because you are
*calling* it an alternative.

Would you say then that Mozilla is doing things wrong in that it allows
readers to see an image's alternate text when the image is displayed? It
does do this -- a user can right-click and select "Properties...", where
the alt text is listed. Should Mozilla be modified to hide this
information? It seems to me that you are arguing that they should.

On 19 Oct 2004 16:14:28 GMT, Sam Hughes <hughes [at] rpi.edu> wrote:
> But you see, the only reason it's an alternative is because you are
> *calling* it an alternative.

What else do you propose alt would mean?

In article <468an0tmmun733em58ojcri3n52m4r6sr3 [at] 4ax.com>,
Sandy <barbarowa [at] yahoo.com> wrote:

> >> That isn't acceptable for my purposes.
> >
> >your design is broken. dump it and start again or just continue wasting
> >your time.
>
> You haven't seen my 'design', so how can you say it is broken? It
> could just be that HTML doesn't provide me with the tools I really
> need.

Design isn't decoration. Design achieves something, like in your case
"User picks a geographic location and gets to know more of that
location". If that is the goal of your design and it does not achieve
this, then you made a bad design.

Note that there are plenty of possibilities to achieve the mentioned
goal; nothing says that it has to be an image map, or that it only has
to be an image map. Also know that I (and plenty of people with me) are
geographically challenged and wouldn't know where to point on a map of
Holland, were I looking for a location there. I live in Holland. And it
is one of the smallest countries in Europe! Were I to choose from a
list, or to enter the location in a search field, I would easily succeed
in finding it.

--
Kris
<kristiaan [at] xs4all.netherlands> (nl)

In article <opsf4l4aka6v6656 [at] news.individual.net>,
Neal <neal413 [at] yahoo.com> wrote:

> > But you see, the only reason it's an alternative is because you are
> > *calling* it an alternative.
>
> What else do you propose alt would mean?

Although.

--
Kris
<kristiaan [at] xs4all.netherlands> (nl)

On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 11:37:36 -0400, Neal <neal413 [at] yahoo.com> wrote:

>> I wouldn't have written that only one line is displayed if it didn't
>> happen that way.
>
>The problem is that rf is right, that's how it's supposed to work. If it
>doesn't, that's an issue.
>
>Check out http://users.rcn.com/neal413/titletest.html and describe what
>you see as a tooltip on each drawing of me in a hat.

Cute example. Everything displayed as it has been suggested that it
would.

I now see what was different in my test of the title 'attribute'. My
text has an initial line followed by a carriage return (not a coded
CR, nor a \n -- just text I typed in and followed up by hitting the
enter key), and then another line followed by a carriage return, and
then several none interrupted lines.

The alt attribute will display it exactly as I typed it.
The title attribute will only display the first line. When it
encounters a carriage return, it quits.

At least now I understand what it's doing, though not necessarily why.
Thanks for your example.

Sandy

On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 19:23:04 GMT, Sandy <barbarowa [at] yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 11:37:36 -0400, Neal <neal413 [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Check out http://users.rcn.com/neal413/titletest.html and describe what
>> you see as a tooltip on each drawing of me in a hat.
>
> Cute example.

I drew that myself, you know.

> At least now I understand what it's doing, though not necessarily why.
> Thanks for your example.

I'm still wondering why Firefox screws it up. Anyone know?

Sam Hughes <hughes [at] rpi.edu> wrote:

> But you see, the only reason it's an alternative is because you are
> *calling* it an alternative.

Did you actually look at the HTML specifications on this? We have not
made up the meaning.

--
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Pages about Web authoring: http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/www.html

In alt.html Disco Octopus said:

> speaking of which, i recently went to the mullimbimbi markets with the wife
> and kids.

nice 4x4 country up in the back blocks there.

> that was interesting.

i bet it was.

--


v o i c e s

"Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela [at] cs.tut.fi> wrote in
news:Xns9587EC1D57B1Ejkorpelacstutfi [at] 193.229.0.31:

> Sam Hughes <hughes [at] rpi.edu> wrote:
>
>> But you see, the only reason it's an alternative is because you are
>> *calling* it an alternative.
>
> Did you actually look at the HTML specifications on this? We have not
> made up the meaning.

But though it is specified as an alternative, that does not mean it is bad
for a browser to tell the user what the alternate text is in a secondary
manner.

For instance, Firefox will show the reader an image's alternate text if the
reader right-clicks and selects "properties." Do you see anything wrong
with this behavior?

Leif K-Brooks wrote:

> Wouldn't work for image maps, which is what the OP's talking about.
> For other images, what's wrong with adding a caption with ordinary
> CSS?

Sorry Leif, I wasn't actually serious, I was just trying to illustrate
why alternate text was 'alternate' and not complimentary.
Not very well obviously.

--
frostie
http://brightonfixedodds.net

On 19 Oct 2004 21:25:40 GMT, Sam Hughes <hughes [at] rpi.edu> wrote:

> But though it is specified as an alternative, that does not mean it is
> bad
> for a browser to tell the user what the alternate text is in a secondary
> manner.
>
> For instance, Firefox will show the reader an image's alternate text if
> the
> reader right-clicks and selects "properties." Do you see anything wrong
> with this behavior?

No, but that's an optional way to view details about an image. Viewing
source code does the same thing.