Specifically because it is the only element whose semantics are "this is a collection o links" - rather than just "this is a collection of stuff, and at the same time has a content model that allows it to be a collection of more or less any kind of links - either those pointed to by an img or object element as a map for the links associated with the rendered object, or on their own. Chaals On Thu, 28 Mar 2002, Steven Pemberton wrote: > > 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>? Steven Pemberton -- Charles McCathieNevile http://www.w3.org/People/Charles phone: +61 409 134 136 W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI fax: +33 4 92 38 78 22 Location: 21 Mitchell street FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia (or W3C INRIA, Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France)Received on Thursday, 28 March 2002 09:34:31 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 13:15:37 GMT