- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charlesn@sunrise.srl.rmit.edu.au>
- Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 09:04:59 +1000 (EST)
- To: WAI <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Nir (I think) said: I think everybody will agree that tables are better than imagemaps... CMcCN:: No. I don't. Image maps can (and should) be provided with ALT text for each AREA, which makes it simple to deal with a text-only version. For people whose alternative is (flawed) screen readers TABLE may not be better. I do agree that use of images as links is not a really great practise - it often causes problems for fully sighted people (http://www.cfd.rmit.edu.au used to be my example, but I haven't looked for a while) who cannot understand how (for example) a light bulb is supposed to imply a gallery, or five horizontal bars an image. A preferable solution is to avoid TABLE as a layout mechanism completely, and to provide alternatives to imagemaps. Charles McCathieNevile
Received on Sunday, 26 July 1998 19:27:03 UTC