W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > March 2015

Re: [whatwg] Responsive image maps

From: Erik Dahlström <ed@opera.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 16:02:12 +0200
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, "Andrea Rendine" <master.skywalker.88@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <op.xwc7xypqdhsuf5@gnorps>
Cc: WHATWG <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>
The active area in the svg is whatever the active graphical shape is, I  
don't quite understand what you mean that it's unclear. The active shape  
can also be styled with css based on :hover or :active rules, for example  
to add an outline or to do some sort of visual highlighting.

For controlling the tab order there's the tabindex attribute (added in  
svg2), which has the same behavior as in html. Tabbing through an svg  
probably works best if the svg is inline in the html document. Support for  
tabindex in svg is implemented in Blink and WebKit already.


On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 21:24:04 +0100, Andrea Rendine  
<master.skywalker.88@gmail.com> wrote:

> One of the 2 objections, I'd say. But the second is probably a matter of
> implementation.
> SVG makes it unclear what's the actual active area when navigating  
> through
> tab key.
>
> 2015-03-25 19:32 GMT+01:00 Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>:
>
>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 10:03 AM, Andrea Rendine
>> <master.skywalker.88@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> Instead, we start by figuring out what problems need solving.
>> > Which is what has been done for this subject, I guess.
>> > PROBLEM: image maps, intended as "shaped link areas related to  
>> specific
>> > regions of an image" are a fairly requested feature. Unfortunately, as
>> > current solutions are not responsive and they can't fit to how images  
>> are
>> > defined in a modern scenario, with scalable size and art direction,
>> authors
>> > have looked for workarounds, script-enhanced or non-native (Flash  
>> maps)
>> > solutions.
>> > POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS: 1. link boxes and CSS, 2. SVG, 3. <map>, where
>> >  1. CSS has a poor range of shapes
>> >  2. See above for SVG
>> >  3. <area> coordinates are absolutely defined.
>> > PROPOSAL: As SVG map is not viable at all in complex <picture>  
>> scenarios,
>> > and not easily viable in simple contexts, authors could benefit from
>> <map>
>> > versatility. So a viable solution *could* be to improve a feature in
>> order
>> > to make it responsive.
>> > The "Map element improvement consortium" is not an organisation I  
>> want to
>> > mindlessly support (basically because it doesn't exists). And
>> unfortunately
>> > I tend to be verbose when I start writing. So in my last message I  
>> tried
>> to
>> > make it shorter and I chose terms incorrectly.
>>
>> Note that we *should* just be able to use <picture> in SVG, which
>> helps that solution.  This is generally useful (we want responsive
>> images inside of SVG, too), and afaict, removes the only objection to
>> SVG.
>>
>> ~TJ
>>


-- 
Erik Dahlstrom, Web Technology Developer, Opera Software
Co-Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
Received on Tuesday, 31 March 2015 14:02:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 17:00:30 UTC