W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > October to December 2016

Re: objects as links

From: <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2016 01:56:15 +0100
To: Michael A. Peters <mpeters@domblogger.net>, "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-Id: <57801480380975@webcorp02h.yandex-team.ru>
Hi Michael,

29.11.2016, 01:13, "Michael A. Peters" <mpeters@domblogger.net>:
> I'm thinking of images but I'm sure this isn't only an issue with image
> links. Take the following HTML
> <div id="topbanner">
>    <a href="https://example.org" target="_blank" title="Buy Stuff from
> Example.Org">
>      <img src="/banners/examplebanner.png" alt="[An example banner]" />
>    </a>
> </div>
> If #topbanner bad is wider than the image, a usability bug is
> introduced. Because the image is a child of the anchor, the anchor is
> not limited to physical screen space of the image and (at least in some
> browsers) empty white space to the right and left of the image will
> trigger the anchor.

In which browsers does that happen?

> This is a UX problem because it is not what users viewing the web page
> expect.

I think it's a bug, which is why people don't expect it to happen.

The normal model would be that the child element, if clicked, becomes a link. So it's only the images, not the whitespace in the middle, that should be active.

> Thinking of the banner in terms of objects, it makes more sense for the
> link and target to be properties of the image itself rather than
> properties of a parent of the image. e.g.
> <div id="topbanner">
>    <img src="/banners/examplebanner.png" alt="[An example banner]"
> title="Buy Stuff from Example.org" data-href="https://example.org"
> data-target="_blank" />
> </div>
> Currently browsers won't know what to do with that, but CSS can change
> the pointer and a JavaScript function attached to the onclick event
> handler can perform the action.
> That solves the UX problem - clicking the white space to left or right
> of the image no longer triggers the action, only clicking on the image
> itself does. Why objects like image don't already have href and target
> attributes I don't know, it seems more logical to me for the link and
> target to be a property of the object that the user interacts with.

This was proposed for XHTML 2, actually.

> But anyway, doing that breaks tab browsing - tab skips over it. I
> suppose tabindex and a listener for enter key press could be used, but
> what's the best way with the least ambiguity to tell accessibility
> software that the object opens up a link?


Hacking this together is possible, but pretty complex.

> Another solution I suppose is to put a container around the a object
> that is exactly same width and height as the image so that it constrains
> the a element on the screen, but that seems conceptually wrong even if
> it works. It seems to me that the conceptually right method is for the
> URI to be a property of the image object.

The HTML Working Group likewise concluded this when they were working on XHTML 2. But I'm not sure that it's going to get traction - there are a lot of simple benefits to the a element as a link.



Charles McCathie Nevile - standards - Yandex
chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Tuesday, 29 November 2016 00:56:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 29 November 2016 00:56:54 UTC