Re: Dropping <input usemap="">

On Aug 16, 2007, at 5:47 PM, Robert Burns wrote:

> I agree with the overall spirit of your message here. I also agree  
> with many of the fine points. On this issue, I disagree however:
>
>> Philip Taylor wrote:
>>> That doesn't seem relevant to the discussion about <input usemap>  
>>> - it just applies to normal client-side image maps via <img  
>>> usemap>. It may be nice if you could style <area>s, but I think  
>>> that's solely CSS and is unrelated to the HTML WG.
>>
>> BTW, I agree with Philip's comment that CSS styling of <area> is  
>> definitely separate from this issue. While styling an <area> would  
>> be at least fun and at most useful, it doesn't change the  
>> functionality of an image map.
>
> That all depends on how you define functionality. As part of good  
> UI (which is what we're talking about here), CSS can certainly  
> improve the user experience. It can even make using the <input  
> usemap> more accessible. The types of effects I described where  
> authors use the 'outline', 'border', 'height' or 'width' properties  
> to change the area upon focus, or hover: those certainly improve  
> the user-experience and can be very functional (imagine a height  
> and width properties ont he area of 105% where on hover the area  
> temporarily bulges out of its bounds). As I also said before, I  
> could see having new CSS3 or CSS4 properties that allow the area of  
> the image to be mutated by an image filter or some other effect  
> upon focus, hover, activate and so on. So while it may not change  
> the functionality of the image map after activation, it certainly  
> effect functionality leading up to activation.

I completely agree that new CSS properties for <area> tags can be of  
great benefit if used properly. My comment was solely meant to deal  
with the reality of separate working groups within the W3C. The  
concept of <area> styling should be pursued either by or with the CSS  
WG.