W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 1999

RE: PRI - 7 Client Side Image Maps

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <po@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 21:15:48 -0500
To: "'GL - WAI Guidelines WG'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000a01be9053$de44f8e0$8cbe6880@gregg>
Hi Charles,

Take a look again. It is correct as written.   It will always be needed for
server side.  But only is needed on CLIENT SIDE until the user agents render
it.  Then it drops off the map for client side (but stays P1 for server)

Does it make sense now on re-reading?

Gregg



-- ------------------------------
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
Professor - Human Factors
Dept of Ind. Engr. - U of Wis.
Director - Trace R & D Center
Gv@trace.wisc.edu, http://trace.wisc.edu/
FAX 608/262-8848
For a list of our listserves send "lists" to listproc@trace.wisc.edu

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Charles McCathieNevile [mailto:charles@w3.org]
Sent:	Monday, April 26, 1999 11:27 AM
To:	Gregg Vanderheiden
Cc:	GL - WAI Guidelines WG (E-mail)
Subject:	Re: PRI - 7    Client Side Image Maps

In the last line of the proposed resolution it says client-side where
server-side is clearly meant.

cheers

On Mon, 26 Apr 1999, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:

  ISSUE - 7:
  An AC Member asked that we remove the priority 2 requirement for redundant
  text links for client-side image maps which is found in Checkpoint 1.2
They
  felt that client side image maps are handled by text browsers and
assistive
  technologies today.  They suggested that  1.2 should say to provide
  redundant links for server-side maps, when server-side maps are required.
  They also suggested we refer to Checkpoint 9.1 in checkpoint 1.2.


  PROPOSED RESOLUTION:
  In examining this item, it was found that there are user agents for all
  platforms that will process client side image maps.  Thus the second list
of
  links is not necessary to provide access.  In fact, it can be confusing on
  these browsers since it lists all of the links twice.  However, it is
still
  a usability problem for those who prefer browsers that do not expose
client
  side links very well.
  The proposal is therefore to set the priority to 3 for client side image
  maps because of the interference problem and the fact that access is
  available through multiple browsers (Lynx, Opera, Pwwebspeak, HomePage
  Reader, etc.)  The priority would remain 1 for client side image maps.


  SPECIFIC WORDING:
  Same as Original Wording except priority for client side is set to 3. (It
  was 2.)

  1.2 Provide redundant text links for each active region of an image map.
  [Priority 1 - if server-side image maps are used], [Priority 3 - if
  client-side image maps are used.]  Redundant text links for client-side
  image maps are only required until user agents render text equivalents for
  the map links.


--Charles McCathieNevile            mailto:charles@w3.org
phone: +1 617 258 0992   http://www.w3.org/People/Charles
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative    http://www.w3.org/WAI
MIT/LCS  -  545 Technology sq., Cambridge MA, 02139,  USA
Received on Monday, 26 April 1999 22:17:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:46:59 GMT