- From: Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
- Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2003 12:24:31 -0700
- To: Ben Godfrey <afternoon@uk2.net>, <www-style@w3.org>
On 6/4/03 11:12 AM, "Ben Godfrey" <afternoon@uk2.net> wrote: > > > On Wednesday, Jun 4, 2003, at 19:02 Europe/London, Tantek Çelik wrote: > >> I agree, this is something we should add to CSS, because it is >> presentational. > > Is it? Certainly _where_ something should be and what _size_ it should be is presentational. Image maps are essentially that with the added ability of being able to specify a _where_ which is not necessarily rectangular. Thus it is absolutely presentational. > What about alt or title values? What about them? They are independent of image maps. They are attributes that can contain content. > The only presentational part is > connecting the content (the links) with the images. Even I'm not at the point of declaring all linking to be presentational! But certainly a large portion of linking is presentational. > Apart from that it's > content because it's not something that can be dropped if the CSS is > missing. Sure it can. An image map is essentially a list of hyperlinks. The presentation of it as a bunch of clickable areas is exactly that purely _presentational_. Consider, how would you present an image map on a voice browser or a PDA that doesn't have the resolution to display the image? You would want to use a different presentation - thus it belongs in a media specific style sheet, not in the markup. > Coming up with some way to use CSS as the connection might be valid, but I > think it will be hard to make the syntax simpler than HTML. Agreed, it will be hard to make the syntax simpler than HTML, but I think it is possible. Certainly I would object to a syntax more complex than HTML (which is unfortunately what seems to happen all too often in W3C technologies that started as useful features of HTML). Tantek
Received on Wednesday, 4 June 2003 15:23:52 UTC