Topic on Talk:Page Previews/Flow

Hovercards are causing the title text of the image links in w:en:Template:NYCS SSI to be hidden. Would it be possible to show the tooltip as well as the hovercard?

My guess is that showing tooltips would be hard (but perhaps I'm wrong).

That template appears to show a dot or diamond, and to be used to convey important information. Completely apart from the problem of relying on tooltips when Hovercards shows the linked template rather than the tooltip, have you talked to the w:en:WP:ACCESS editors about whether a small icon with a tooltip is the best way to present that information?

This question has also made me wonder how Hovercards interacts with templates that are used to build tables.

I don't think it's a very good way of presenting the information, but usually there's a legend describing what they mean, such as this one. Hoever, it gets confusing since it's difficult to remember what they mean (there are at least 18 options of monochrome circles and diamonds, with some symbols being reused). Is it possible to unhide the title= attribute only if the <a> contains an <img>?

How would interaction with table-building templates be different to normal behaviour on link hovers?

I was surprised that hovering over an image in the table at w:en:Staten Island Railway#Main Line stations would link me to w:en:List of New York City Subway services#Time periods, so now I'm wondering what other odd behaviors might happen from some of these complicated templates.

I think this template is an outlier, since this sort of link is usually discouraged by the Manual of Style (at least on enwiki), and most other transport systems don't have this sort of convoluted time period system. The Staten Island Railway has the same operator, rolling stock and fare as the New York City Subway, so it's not too unexpected.

I just created a task for the alt text with links issue: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T173984

Should I create one for the second for tables generated by templates? I'm not sure I fully understand the problem there. :)

I don't think the table thing is a software bug, more to do with confusing article structure.

Chris, I don't think that you should file a second bug report. It might make a fun test case, but I don't think that there are any bugs there.