Re: Mailing list archives: feeback requested on proposedimprovements (2: view)

Dominique Hazaël-Massieux wrote:

> le jeu 28-03-2002 à 10:42, Steven Pemberton a écrit :
> 
>>>>I don't get the idea of putting the navbar in a <map> (client side image
>>>>map). What's the point? What do you gain?
>>>>
>>>This is for accessibility reason. See:
>>>http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-HTML-TECHS/#group-bypass
>>>
>>Ooh I hadn't spotted this before. This is weird tag abuse. Can anyone
>>explain to me what the accessibility advantages are of using a client-side
>>image map not as a client-side image map, but as a container for links?
>>
>>Why is it better than using a <p> or a <div>?
>>
> 
> Good question. Maybe Al will be able to give more input on that.
> Interestingly, it looks like this usage of <map> is not considered good
> anymore:
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wai-gl-tech-issues.html#group-bypass
> "A further conclusion is that we do not want to recommend the MAP element 
> as a way to group links since it is a non-standard use of the element."


That's unfortunate that the WCAG WG concluded that after:

  1) That proposal being integrated into HTML 4.01, and
  2) A fair amount of time spent in the UAWG trying to meet the need
    of recognizing MAP as navigation markup.

I have not been party to the discussion in the WCAG WG, but I'm
a little disappointed to hear that now they're unrecommending what
is not *yet* standard practice but might have been.

  _ Ian

-- 
Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                     +1 718 260-9447