Re: Dropping <input usemap="">

HI Philip,

I apologize  for the confusion. I've been combining email messages  
from different members in my mind. I was combining what you said  
about different implementations with what Lachlan said here:
On Aug 15, 2007, at 2:47 PM, Lachlan Hunt wrote:
> Michael A. Puls II wrote:
>> The way Firefox handles <input usemap> is great. At the moment, I  
>> can't think of one thing about its implementation that is wrong or  
>> unexpected.
>
> Except that, as implemented, it provides none of the purported  
> accessibility benefits, since clicking on an area of the client  
> side map doesn't submit the form, it follows the hyperlink.   
> Submitting the form with a specific set of co-ordinates would be  
> the only logical reason for wanting a client side image map on an  
> input control designed for form submission.  If you want hyperlink  
> image map, use img.

I see now that this is wrong however, The <inpug usemap> does submit  
the form with the coordinates (doesn't it?). So FireFox and Opera  
implement this correctly. But that's hardly changes my expectation of  
author use for this feature if IE does not implement it correctly  
(though I'm less surprised to see some use of it)

Let me try to respond here again with that in mind.


On Aug 15, 2007, at 6:18 PM, Philip Taylor wrote:

>
> Robert Burns wrote:
>> The other Phillip Taylor already made this point, but I want to  
>> clarify. Providing |blink| and some CSS will work interoperably.   
>> If the browser doesn't support |blink| natively, the CSS can  
>> provide a similarly obnoxious visual effect. If <input  
>> type='image' usmap> doesn't work as intended, then there's no  
>> point in using it at all.
>
> It does work as intended in Firefox and Opera [see below], and it  
> falls back to the basic server-side image map functionality in IE  
> (like how <blink> falls back to a CSS-stylable element in IE), so  
> people can still benefit from its intended functionality by using  
> it now.

What about the case when there is no server-side to fall back on?  
Someone could create an interface that had no server-side map. And  
once you're using a server-side map what does the author gain by  
implementing the same map client-side. The idea as I see it is that  
an author could implement the map only once (client-side) and not  
need to do it again server-side.

>>>> However, creating a client-side image map that submits form  
>>>> data, is not something that can sorta work in some browsers and  
>>>> not in others.
>>>
>>> I may be misunderstanding you, but it's never possible to create  
>>> client-side image maps that submit form data in any browser -  
>>> form submission only happens as part of server-side image maps.
>> No, you're understanding me here. In other words, the  <input  
>> type='image' usmap> feature works in 0% of implementations  
>> (according to your research) so why would we expect to find  
>> authors using it?
>
> Sorry, I may have been unclear: it does work as intended in Firefox  
> (but only with type=image, which I think is a bug according to  
> HTML4) and in Opera (on other input types too).
>
> By "it's never possible to create client-side image maps that  
> submit form data in any browser", I meant you can still do <input  
> type=image usemap=#m> which will create a client-side image map on  
> top of a server-side image map button, but the client-side  
> component of it will never submit form data (since it's just plain  
> <area href> links instead).

However, with no hrefs, the image map areas should instead submit the  
form with the coordinates (again, there doesn't have to be a server- 
side to this; some use-cases do not require a server-side round- 
trip). Also the data Ian reported was only for pages with @href set,  
so those are pages where using <input type-'image' > is the same as  
using <img>. The interesting statistic (especially if IE supported  
this; it doesn't right?), would be what sites use <input type='image'  
usemap=''> where @usemap points to a |map| with |area| elements that  
have the @coords attribute set. Those are the sites using the feature  
we're discussing.

Take care,
Rob

Received on Thursday, 16 August 2007 00:17:55 UTC