Marco Schuster wrote: Yes. *.wikipedia.org, *.wiktionary.org... Wikimedia.org is an special case in which are some external subdomains so *.wikimedia.org cookies are not used.

Simetrical wrote: <iframe>s probably would work, actually. *Shudder*. :D -- brion

On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 8:40 PM, &lt;jidanni(a)jidanni.org&gt; wrote: Now that's a sensible idea.

And it wouldn't show up for sane browsers like FF which use the title="" instead of alt="" to display when no images are in the page. If you did include a title in addition to that, then 100% of users would get that false information on hover. ~Daniel Friesen(Dantman) of: -The Nadir-Point Group (http://nadir-point.com) --It's Wiki-Tools subgroup (http://wiki-tools.com) --Games-G.P.S. (http://ggps.org) -And Wikia ACG on Wikia.com (http://wikia.com/wiki/Wikia_ACG) Domas Mituzas wrote:

On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 3:16 AM, Domas Mituzas &lt;midom.lists(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: "alt" is not supposed to be used for hover text for like ten years. HTML 4.0 introduced the "title" attribute for this purpose: http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-html401-19991224/struct/global.html#title Firefox, Opera, and other reasonable and remotely recent browsers don't display the alt attribute as a tooltip under any circumstances. IE, of course, does, but that can be easily circumvented by adding a title attribute, which overrides the alt attribute in any version of IE more recent than the Neolithic. In particular, an empty title attribute causes it to display no popup. Alternatively, an informative title attribute could be added for its hover text. On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 3:31 AM, DanTMan &lt;dan_the_man(a)telus.net&gt; wrote: The point is that you would *not* put the information on hover, only as alt text.

On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 9:26 AM, Stephen Bain &lt;stephen.bain(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: It's better to display it as alt text, so that the irrelevant information is hidden if the browser does in fact support images (which will practically always be the case).

2008/6/16 Lane, Ryan &lt;Ryan.Lane(a)ocean.navo.navy.mil&gt;il>: Yes, I think it would. Alt text isn't just used if the image hasn't loaded, it's used whenever the image isn't available to the user, which includes screen readers.

On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 9:31 AM, Platonides &lt;Platonides(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: Better to force them to log in multiple times (if there even is such a browser, which seems somewhat unlikely) than to force everyone with images disabled, which is almost certainly a larger group.

I think that's an issue of using the correct text. Try to find some text that doesn't say that one has or has not been unified loginned, but that this depends on image loading. If I were using a screen reader, after such a text I would not be expecting either behaviour very confidently. 2008/6/16 Lane, Ryan &lt;Ryan.Lane(a)ocean.navo.navy.mil&gt;il>: -- Andre Engels, andreengels(a)gmail.com ICQ: 6260644 -- Skype: a_engels

Lane, Ryan &lt;Ryan.Lane(a)ocean.navo.navy.mil&gt; wrote: Not if it's carefully worded. With the alt text, screen readers might output something like "Logging you in to Wikimedia's other projects / (this requires that images be enabled)". -- Yours cordially, Jesse Plamondon-Willard (Pathoschild)