- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 11:32:45 -0400
- To: pjenkins@us.ibm.com
- CC: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
pjenkins@us.ibm.com wrote:
>
> Why can't we just suggest a new block element <nav>? The element could
> contain layout tables, maps, or lists for example. UA could then treat
> <nav> as "chucks" or blocks of information that the user could skip over if
> desired. Authors could then apply style to <nav> etc.
This is <map>, isn't it? We changed HTML 4.01 to make it clearer
that this was the purpose of <map> [1]:
The MAP element specifies a client-side image map
(or other navigation mechanism) that may be associated
with another elements (IMG, OBJECT, or INPUT). An image map
is associated with an element via the element's
usemap attribute. The MAP element may be used without an
associated image for general navigation mechanisms.
- Ian
P.S. Forgive me if this comment is out of context; I haven't read the
thread in detail...
[1]
http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-html401-19991224/struct/objects.html#edef-MAP
--
Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel: +1 831 457-2842
Cell: +1 917 450-8783
Received on Wednesday, 14 June 2000 11:32:56 UTC