Related
This is one I have not had to tackle before. I need to use alt tags on all images in a site including those used by CSS background-image attribute.
There is no CSS property like this as far as I know, so what is the best way to do this please?
Background images sure can present data! In fact, this is often recommended where presenting visual icons is more compact and user-friendly than an equivalent list of text blurbs. Any use of image sprites can benefit from this approach.
It is quite common for hotel listings icons to display amenities. Imagine a page which listed 50 hotel and each hotel had 10 amenities. A CSS Sprite would be perfect for this sort of thing -- better user experience because it's faster. But how do you implement ALT tags for these images? Example site.
The answer is that they don't use alt text at all, but instead use the title attribute on the containing div.
HTML
<div class="hotwire-fitness" title="Fitness Centre"></div>
CSS
.hotwire-fitness {
float: left;
margin-right: 5px;
background: url(/prostyle/images/new_amenities.png) -71px 0;
width: 21px;
height: 21px;
}
According to the W3C (see links above), the title attribute serves much of the same purpose as the alt attribute
Title
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:
alt
The alt attribute is defined in a set of tags (namely, img, area and optionally for input and applet) to allow you to provide a text equivalent for the object.
A text equivalent brings the following benefits to your website and its visitors in the following common situations:
nowadays, Web browsers are available in a very wide variety of platforms with very different capacities; some cannot display images at all or only a restricted set of type of images; some can be configured to not load images. If your code has the alt attribute set in its images, most of these browsers will display the description you gave instead of the images
some of your visitors cannot see images, be they blind, color-blind, low-sighted; the alt attribute is of great help for those people that can rely on it to have a good idea of what's on your page
search engine bots belong to the two above categories: if you want your website to be indexed as well as it deserves, use the alt attribute to make sure that they won't miss important sections of your pages.
In this Yahoo Developer Network (archived link) article it is suggested that if you absolutely must use a background-image instead of img element and alt attribute, use ARIA attributes as follows:
<div role="img" aria-label="adorable puppy playing on the grass">
...
</div>
The use case in the article describes how Flickr chose to use background images because performance was greatly improved on mobile devices.
I think you should read this post by Christian Heilmann. He explains that background images are ONLY for aesthetics and should not be used to present data, and are therefore exempt from the rule that every image should have alternate-text.
Excerpt (emphasis mine):
CSS background images which are by definition only of aesthetic value
– not visual content of the document itself. If you need to put an
image in the page that has meaning then use an IMG element and give it
an alternative text in the alt attribute.
I agree with him.
As mentioned in other answers, there is no (supported) alt attribute for a div tag only for the img tag.
The real question is why you need to add the alt attribute to all background images for the site? Based on this answer, it will help you determine which route to take in your approach.
Visual/Textual: If you are simply attempting to add a textual fall back for the user if the image fails to load, simply use the title attribute. Most browsers will provide a visual tool tip(message box) when a user hovers over the image, and if the image is not loaded for whatever reason, it behaves the same as an alt attribute presenting text when image fails. This technique still allows for the site to speed up load times by keeping images set to backgrounds.
Screen Readers: The middle of the road option, this varies because technically keeping your images as backgrounds and using the title attribute approach should work as hinted above, "Audio user agents may speak the title information in a similar context." However this is not guaranteed to work in all cases, including some readers may ignore it all together. If you end up opting for this approach, you can also try adding in aria-labels to help ensure screen readers pick these up.
SEO/Search Engines: Here is the big one, if you were like me, you added your background images, all was good. Then months later the customer(or maybe yourself) realized that you are missing out on some prime SEO gold by not having alt's for your images. Keep in mind, the title attribute does not have any weight on search engines, from my research and as mentioned in an article here: https://www.searchenginejournal.com/how-to-use-link-title-attribute-correctly/. So if you are aiming for SEO, then you will need to have an img tag with the alt attribute. One possible approach is to just load very small actual images on the site with alt attributes, this way you get all the SEO and don't have to readjust the existing CSS in place. However this may lead to additional load time depending on the size and google does indeed look at the images path when indexing. In short if you are going this route, just accept what has to be done and include the actual images instead of using backgrounds.
The general belief is that you shouldn't be using background images for things with meaningful semantic value so there isn't really a proper way to store alt data with those images. The important question is what are you going to be doing with that alt data? Do you want it to display if the images don't load? Do you need it for some programmatic function on the page? You could store the data arbitrarily using made up css properties that have no meaning (might cause errors?) OR by adding in hidden images that have the image and the alt tag, and then when you need a background images alt you can compare the image paths and then handle the data however you want using some custom script to simulate what you need. There's no way I know of to make the browser automatically handle some sort of alt attribute for background images though.
This article from W3C tells you what they think you should do
https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/ARIATechnique_usingImgRole_with_aria-label_forCSS-backgroundImage
and has examples here
http://mars.dequecloud.com/demo/ImgRole.htm
among which
<a href="http://www.facebook.com">
<span class="fb_logo" role="img" aria-label="Connect via Facebook">
</span>
</a>
Still, if, like in the above example, the element containing the background image is just an empty container, I personally prefer to put the text in there and hide it using CSS; right where you show the image instead:
<a href="http://www.facebook.com"><span class="fb_logo">
Connect via Facebook
</span></a>
.fb_logo {
height: 37px; width: 37px;
background-image: url('../gfx/logo-facebook.svg');
color:transparent; overflow:hidden; /* hide the text */
}
The classical way to achieve this is to put the text into the div and use an image replacement technique.
<div class"ir background-image">Your alt text</div>
with background-image beeing the class where you assign the background image and ir could be HTML5boilerplates image replacement class, below:
/* ==========================================================================
Helper classes
========================================================================== */
/*
* Image replacement
*/
.ir {
background-color: transparent;
border: 0;
overflow: hidden;
/* IE 6/7 fallback */
*text-indent: -9999px;
}
.ir:before {
content: "";
display: block;
width: 0;
height: 150%;
}
Here's my solution for Immediate fix:
Once the background image is removed the alt text will be visible from Img tag.
.alt-image {
position: absolute;
top: 0;
left: 0;
z-index: -1;
}
.background-image{
background:url("https://www.w3schools.com/images/picture.jpg") no-repeat;
width:100%;
height:500px;
position:relative;
}
<div role="img" aria-label="place alt text here" title="place alt text here" class="background-image">
<img src="" alt="place alt text here" class="alt-image"/>
</div>
Here's my solution to this type of problem:
Create a new class in CSS and position off screen. Then put your alt text in HTML right before the property that calls your background image. Can be any tag, H1, H2, p, etc.
CSS
<style type="text/css">
.offleft {
margin-left: -9000px;
position: absolute;
}
</style>
HTML
<h1 class="offleft">put your alt text here</h1>
<div class or id that calls your bg image> </div>
It''s not clear to me what you want.
If you want a CSS property to render the alt attribute value, then perhaps you're looking for the CSS attribute function for example:
IMG:before { content: attr(alt) }
If you want to put the alt attribute on a background image, then ... that's odd because the alt attribute is an HTML attribute whereas the background image is a CSS property. If you want to use the HTML alt attribute then I think you'd need a corresponding HTML element to put it in.
Why do you "need to use alt tags on background images": is this for a semantic reason or for some visual-effect reason (and if so, then what effect or what reason)?
You can achieve this by putting the alt tag in the div were your image will appear.
Example:
<div id="yourImage" alt="nameOfImage"></div>
This question already has answers here:
When to use IMG vs. CSS background-image?
(31 answers)
Closed 9 years ago.
What's the best practice and established way to portray an image? I am working from the assumption that it shouldn't be done in HTML anymore so I am not using the img tag in my markup. Instead, I am linking the image in my CSS via background: url('dir'). If I am already going wrong with this assumption, let me know.
If linking an image in CSS is the correct (or at least a good, well established) way to go, then the next question is what HTML tag to use in the document? Technically, images can be applied to just about any element in HTML, so which one's the right one to use?
Case in point: Right now I am working on a row of icons where each icon has some text underneath it. At the moment, I have it set up as an unordered, horizontal list and I am applying the image and text in my CSS to each individual list item tag. However, there are several other ways I could do this. I could have a row of divs or spans, for example. Or I could use the img tag without defining the src property in the HTML and instead setting it in the CSS (at least I think this is possible). Or several other ways I can think.
What is the best practice in cases like this?
Images should be displayed with the <img> tag if the image is contextual information on the page. For example, if you have a web page showing custom swimming pools you build, your image of the swimming pools (under normal circumstances) should be set on the page using the <img> tag with an appropriate alt attribute.
// Shows a picture of a pool, provides contextual fallback text
<img src="pool.png" alt="The 'Custome' style pool." />
CSS background images are used more for stylist or decorations on the page. The background image of your webpage is not contextual, so it is set with a background image, for example. However, CSS background images are used for things such as sprites or JavaScript sliders. In these cases, special measures are taken to make sure they are still specified as contextual content (such as setting the title attribute).
// Alert icon is just a design element and does not
// provide context to the page
<div class="alert-icon"></div>
.alert-icon{background:url('alert.png');width:42px;height:42px}
It is also important to note that, by default, <img> will be printed and background-image will not. Chrome, as well as other browsers, now have an option to turn on background printing, but if you want to be 100% certain an image prints, <img> is the way to go.
TL;DR: For the majority of cases, use <img> for contextual images with proper alt attributes. Use CSS background images for decorations or sprites that do not convey context to the site.
Using CSS to display images using the background property is best if you want to display a sprite whose image can be manipulated via class or id. Other than that, using the <img> tag is still in practice.
If I have the choice to insert images directly into the html or in the css, say for example a link wrapped in an image I could do either...
<img src="#" alt="" width="" height="" />
Or I could do...
<a id="img" href="#"></a>
#img {background: url('#') no-repeat; height: #; width: #;}
Which is better and why? Both work as wanted but is there any difference to load times etc, or any considered better practice?
Using images in HTML is better when the image has any contextual meaning... if it is a decorative picture without any contextual meaning, then use CSS. CSS is for presentation, HTML is for content.
The best hint for you to determine whether to use HTML or CSS for a picture is:
If I remove the picture, will the web-page content still make sense?
An image in HTML is meant to provide a visual meaning in context, with a meaningful text fall-back. Using an A element without any content should be avoided since its content will have a relationship with the link, for browsers and web-crawlers (such a Google bot).
Use CSS images only for decorative purposes. Otherwise it can damage your search engine rankings. Always provide an alt attribute for images, determine what will it be imagining that an eventual visitor cannot see any images.
If the image has context, such as a logo, or a photo, I would suggest loading it as an <img> Make sure you are providing alt text for accessibility and SEO reasons as well.
If an image has no context in the scope of the page, then I think the correct place for it, is defined the in the CSS which controls the design.
The whole idea is to separate your presentation from your content as much as you can. An Image can be content, and if so, should be in it.
Generally, I try to put as many images in CSS as possible but Doozer and Mario have good points. If the image is important to the context, it can go in the HTML. I will also use <img> tags when text needs to float around and image.
One thing that CSS can do that <img> can't are CSS image sprites. This is the only real performance benefit that you'll get from one or the other. Performance-hungry websites like youtube.com will combine many images into one large composite image in order to cut down on the HTTP traffic (and therefore the page load times). For example, this is a sprite taken from youtube.com.
Follow principles of semantic HTML. If the image is content, ie a thumbnail, photo, or button, use an <img> element. If it is more a part of the page design, a background image may be more appropriate.
A more specific example: If you are using your image as an icon next to a text link, use a background-image:
<span class="printIcon" onclick="window.print()">Print</a>
.printIcon { background: url(...) no-repeat; padding-left: 20px }
If your image is the button itself, with no text aspect, use an <img> element with an appropriate alt attribute that would work to substitue for the image if it is unavailable.
<img src="printButton.png" alt="Print" onclick="window.print()" />
I have a large div with the site header/logo as the background image. Is there anything wrong with putting a h2 tag containing the site title behind this using z-index, so that it would show if the user couldn't/didn't get the image for some reason? I know this is different to a standard [background on the h2 element] image replacement. (EDIT: Sorry maybe i'm not making it clear - i'm using a div background image not an IMG tag)
You should use the alt attribute of the img tag, so if the image isn't loaded for some reason, the text would appear.
This is exactly why the alt attr exists,.
If possible, I would ditch the div and just use an h2 with an id and set a background image to that.
I do that whenever possible to avoid excessive divs when I could use other block-level elements, if it only has a background and text. An h* with a background image is still a heading.
You can simple place img tag with alt attribute. That way if image is not loaded, text will be displayed.
<img src="" alt="This text will be displayed" />
Google doesn't like what you describe:
http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=66353
However, from a pure design perspective, there is no real problem, save some bloated code.
You might want to see how often your images fail before you attempt any changes.
That's fine. Note that many feel the site logo isn't really something you'd put into an h* tag other than on the home page, when it makes sense to put it in an h1 tag.
This is one I have not had to tackle before. I need to use alt tags on all images in a site including those used by CSS background-image attribute.
There is no CSS property like this as far as I know, so what is the best way to do this please?
Background images sure can present data! In fact, this is often recommended where presenting visual icons is more compact and user-friendly than an equivalent list of text blurbs. Any use of image sprites can benefit from this approach.
It is quite common for hotel listings icons to display amenities. Imagine a page which listed 50 hotel and each hotel had 10 amenities. A CSS Sprite would be perfect for this sort of thing -- better user experience because it's faster. But how do you implement ALT tags for these images? Example site.
The answer is that they don't use alt text at all, but instead use the title attribute on the containing div.
HTML
<div class="hotwire-fitness" title="Fitness Centre"></div>
CSS
.hotwire-fitness {
float: left;
margin-right: 5px;
background: url(/prostyle/images/new_amenities.png) -71px 0;
width: 21px;
height: 21px;
}
According to the W3C (see links above), the title attribute serves much of the same purpose as the alt attribute
Title
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:
alt
The alt attribute is defined in a set of tags (namely, img, area and optionally for input and applet) to allow you to provide a text equivalent for the object.
A text equivalent brings the following benefits to your website and its visitors in the following common situations:
nowadays, Web browsers are available in a very wide variety of platforms with very different capacities; some cannot display images at all or only a restricted set of type of images; some can be configured to not load images. If your code has the alt attribute set in its images, most of these browsers will display the description you gave instead of the images
some of your visitors cannot see images, be they blind, color-blind, low-sighted; the alt attribute is of great help for those people that can rely on it to have a good idea of what's on your page
search engine bots belong to the two above categories: if you want your website to be indexed as well as it deserves, use the alt attribute to make sure that they won't miss important sections of your pages.
In this Yahoo Developer Network (archived link) article it is suggested that if you absolutely must use a background-image instead of img element and alt attribute, use ARIA attributes as follows:
<div role="img" aria-label="adorable puppy playing on the grass">
...
</div>
The use case in the article describes how Flickr chose to use background images because performance was greatly improved on mobile devices.
I think you should read this post by Christian Heilmann. He explains that background images are ONLY for aesthetics and should not be used to present data, and are therefore exempt from the rule that every image should have alternate-text.
Excerpt (emphasis mine):
CSS background images which are by definition only of aesthetic value
– not visual content of the document itself. If you need to put an
image in the page that has meaning then use an IMG element and give it
an alternative text in the alt attribute.
I agree with him.
As mentioned in other answers, there is no (supported) alt attribute for a div tag only for the img tag.
The real question is why you need to add the alt attribute to all background images for the site? Based on this answer, it will help you determine which route to take in your approach.
Visual/Textual: If you are simply attempting to add a textual fall back for the user if the image fails to load, simply use the title attribute. Most browsers will provide a visual tool tip(message box) when a user hovers over the image, and if the image is not loaded for whatever reason, it behaves the same as an alt attribute presenting text when image fails. This technique still allows for the site to speed up load times by keeping images set to backgrounds.
Screen Readers: The middle of the road option, this varies because technically keeping your images as backgrounds and using the title attribute approach should work as hinted above, "Audio user agents may speak the title information in a similar context." However this is not guaranteed to work in all cases, including some readers may ignore it all together. If you end up opting for this approach, you can also try adding in aria-labels to help ensure screen readers pick these up.
SEO/Search Engines: Here is the big one, if you were like me, you added your background images, all was good. Then months later the customer(or maybe yourself) realized that you are missing out on some prime SEO gold by not having alt's for your images. Keep in mind, the title attribute does not have any weight on search engines, from my research and as mentioned in an article here: https://www.searchenginejournal.com/how-to-use-link-title-attribute-correctly/. So if you are aiming for SEO, then you will need to have an img tag with the alt attribute. One possible approach is to just load very small actual images on the site with alt attributes, this way you get all the SEO and don't have to readjust the existing CSS in place. However this may lead to additional load time depending on the size and google does indeed look at the images path when indexing. In short if you are going this route, just accept what has to be done and include the actual images instead of using backgrounds.
The general belief is that you shouldn't be using background images for things with meaningful semantic value so there isn't really a proper way to store alt data with those images. The important question is what are you going to be doing with that alt data? Do you want it to display if the images don't load? Do you need it for some programmatic function on the page? You could store the data arbitrarily using made up css properties that have no meaning (might cause errors?) OR by adding in hidden images that have the image and the alt tag, and then when you need a background images alt you can compare the image paths and then handle the data however you want using some custom script to simulate what you need. There's no way I know of to make the browser automatically handle some sort of alt attribute for background images though.
This article from W3C tells you what they think you should do
https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/ARIATechnique_usingImgRole_with_aria-label_forCSS-backgroundImage
and has examples here
http://mars.dequecloud.com/demo/ImgRole.htm
among which
<a href="http://www.facebook.com">
<span class="fb_logo" role="img" aria-label="Connect via Facebook">
</span>
</a>
Still, if, like in the above example, the element containing the background image is just an empty container, I personally prefer to put the text in there and hide it using CSS; right where you show the image instead:
<a href="http://www.facebook.com"><span class="fb_logo">
Connect via Facebook
</span></a>
.fb_logo {
height: 37px; width: 37px;
background-image: url('../gfx/logo-facebook.svg');
color:transparent; overflow:hidden; /* hide the text */
}
The classical way to achieve this is to put the text into the div and use an image replacement technique.
<div class"ir background-image">Your alt text</div>
with background-image beeing the class where you assign the background image and ir could be HTML5boilerplates image replacement class, below:
/* ==========================================================================
Helper classes
========================================================================== */
/*
* Image replacement
*/
.ir {
background-color: transparent;
border: 0;
overflow: hidden;
/* IE 6/7 fallback */
*text-indent: -9999px;
}
.ir:before {
content: "";
display: block;
width: 0;
height: 150%;
}
Here's my solution for Immediate fix:
Once the background image is removed the alt text will be visible from Img tag.
.alt-image {
position: absolute;
top: 0;
left: 0;
z-index: -1;
}
.background-image{
background:url("https://www.w3schools.com/images/picture.jpg") no-repeat;
width:100%;
height:500px;
position:relative;
}
<div role="img" aria-label="place alt text here" title="place alt text here" class="background-image">
<img src="" alt="place alt text here" class="alt-image"/>
</div>
Here's my solution to this type of problem:
Create a new class in CSS and position off screen. Then put your alt text in HTML right before the property that calls your background image. Can be any tag, H1, H2, p, etc.
CSS
<style type="text/css">
.offleft {
margin-left: -9000px;
position: absolute;
}
</style>
HTML
<h1 class="offleft">put your alt text here</h1>
<div class or id that calls your bg image> </div>
It''s not clear to me what you want.
If you want a CSS property to render the alt attribute value, then perhaps you're looking for the CSS attribute function for example:
IMG:before { content: attr(alt) }
If you want to put the alt attribute on a background image, then ... that's odd because the alt attribute is an HTML attribute whereas the background image is a CSS property. If you want to use the HTML alt attribute then I think you'd need a corresponding HTML element to put it in.
Why do you "need to use alt tags on background images": is this for a semantic reason or for some visual-effect reason (and if so, then what effect or what reason)?
You can achieve this by putting the alt tag in the div were your image will appear.
Example:
<div id="yourImage" alt="nameOfImage"></div>