W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-respimg@w3.org > November 2013

Re: srcN - Alternative to picture and srcset

From: Aaron Gustafson <aaron@easy-designs.net>
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2013 10:39:58 -0500
To: Anselm Hannemann <info@anselm-hannemann.com>
Cc: Yoav Weiss <yoav@yoav.ws>, Attiks <attiks@gmail.com>, Marcos Caceres <marcos@marcosc.com>, "matmarquis.com" <mat@matmarquis.com>, François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Shane Hudson <shane@shanehudson.net>, "public-respimg@w3.org" <public-respimg@w3.org>, Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
Message-ID: <F3007A185470455FBB52009222F7E660@easy-designs.net>
On Sunday, November 3, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Anselm Hannemann wrote:
> I am not sure about this but I do think we cannot postpone this for an img attribute solution.
> As usemap is an attribute referring to the img element’s source (in this case src-N) it should (must??) be supported by src-N.
> For picture, as this is a completely new and different element, there is no need to support it though.

Agreed, we need to address it, but this is gonna be an interesting can of worms. For MQs I can’t see doing anything but supplying multiple maps (ick).

I realize its a bit of a cop-out, but would it be horrible to declare usemap incompatible with srcN?

Do we have #s on current use of client-side image maps? They are not a current best practice for numerous reasons (not the least of which is accessibility).

Cheers,

Aaron

--  
Aaron Gustafson
@AaronGustafson
aaron-gustafson.com

-------
Aaron takes no responsibility for poor spelling in this message. It was pecked out by fat fingers on a tiny screen.
Received on Sunday, 3 November 2013 15:41:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:06:10 UTC