Talk:Mouseover

Old comment
"Some mouseovers are programmed in Java. Again, this is not to be recommended since not every web browser is equipped with a Java plugin." Doesn't sound NPOV to me.

Rollover
Should this article be merged with Rollover? --Terrible Tim 20:00, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


 * see below? Hymek (talk) 17:25, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

event handlers
a mouseover is an event handler, typical of many languages that support GUIs.

its the pointer, not the mouse
"when you hold a computer mouse over a hyperlink or linking image." lets me see people moving their physical mouse in front of the screen. "when you place the mouse pointer over a hyperlink or linking image."?

BTW: I disagree with TT, mouseover works with text, rollover is an image feature. CJ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.16.126.38 (talk) 11:13, August 30, 2007 (UTC)

NPOV
"Some mouseovers are programmed in Java. Again, this is not to be recommended since not every web browser is equipped with a Java plugin." Doesn't sound NPOV to me. I strongly agree with that old comment. The article not only pushes a POV but a wrong POV. More from the article: "Flash-based mouseovers and menu bars, however, are even worse in this respect." That's the opposite of reality. Unless it's supposed to be a thought experiment or reverse psychology, it should be reworded. Flash is more widespread than Java. It is Java that is disabled for security purposes. Concerns with compatibility and portability take precedence once security is achieved e.g. by Javascript which introduces measures of security. Erudecorp ? * 01:49, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Merge
I think this article should be merged with Tooltip. It makes no sense to have two such short and closely related articles separate. Dar-Ape 01:37, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * True, tooltip doesn't really deserve its own article, but all info from that page should really be copied into the more general Mouseouver article. Towel401 (talk) 01:44, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree; both should end up at Mouseover. Sorry for being ambiguous.  Dar-Ape 20:56, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge in rollover (web design) while you're at it?--NapoliRoma (talk) 08:23, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I don’t necessarily agree. I like having tooltip as one element of a set of graphical user interface elements. This makes is simple and easy to find. A mouseover is not an element; it is an action that can invoke certain behaviors, one of which is to display a tooltip. —Djr372 17:54, 3 January 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Djr372 (talk • contribs)
 * There'd still be a redir from "tooltip", so it should'nt be any less easy to find.--NapoliRoma (talk) 21:55, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It would make most sense (to me) to have Mouseover as the main article, Tooltip as a sub-section of that article, and have the Tooltip page re-direct to Mouseover.Julianhall (talk) 17:03, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * You can't have a tooltip without a mouseover. well maybe technically you can but it wouldn't be very useful. but you can have a mouseover without having a tooltip Towel401 (talk) 19:11, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Tooltips are UI widgets that can appear on mouseover. They are separate topics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.209.16.234 (talk) 20:21, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Mouseover is just an event. Many things can be programmed to occur on mouseover.


 * Mouseover and Tooltips are totally different. A tooltip is the resultant action of a MouseHover event whilst a MouseOver event is a completely different event and does not in fact create tooltips.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.74.0.140 (talk) 12:41, 6 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Do not merge. Mouseover is an action, Tooltip is an attribute of the element, a small description and as such, it can be permanent or showed with an action, as the mouseover is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.146.237.253 (talk) 02:35, 22 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I am also in the "do not merge" camp. At a fundamental level, mouseovers are necessary for the normal implementation of tooltips, but they are not the same concept at all.  Perhaps there are some people who use the term "mouseover" as a synonym for "tooltip"?  I haven't encountered that, but if it's the case, we could put a note on "mouseover" pointing to "tooltip".  It seems to me that merging the articles would sacrifice conceptual clarity in the interest of longer articles. I think the relationship between mice and cursors is somewhat similar, even more closely related than these are.  We would not want to merge those articles, and I don't think we should merge this one either.  Ikrieg (talk) 23:51, 26 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Do not merge. "Tooltip" is a much more focused concept than "mouseover."  I would think of a mouseover as including things like highlighting, menu expansion, etc., none of which are tooltips, obviously. —Dfass (talk) 21:06, 23 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Do not merge. I disagree with merging Mouseover with Tooltip.  Mouseover is an action and the Tooltip is a reaction the result perhaps of a mouseover.  Please also see the other reasons outlined above.  They are separate and distinct terms and should not be confused. Deevincentday (talk) 21:49, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Consensus would appear to be against merging. No-one has commented for over three months. It should be safe to remove the merge banners now, which I will do. Hymek (talk) 17:24, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

How to Block?
It can be hard to use many web sites, because it can be hard to avoid accidental mouseovers triggering menus in Firefox, tooltips, etc. 108.45.79.25 (talk) 20:38, 11 May 2016 (UTC)