Rt.gif, Lt.png? 4 years is fine.

4 years is fine, this is a significant problem, but probably not worth
designing an independent web browser for.
Perhaps you could help me get this considered by the appropriate persons.

It won't be easy

I had a report back from bugzilla
"A decent design would adjust the z-indeces to place the small image above
the big image."*

I do hope it is clear that this clearly demonstrates, how much difficulty I
am experiencing, defining and communicating the problem.
My gut feeling is that transparent areas not receiving clicks is a first
step, and probably the most important step, for the present.
partial transparency will possibly be used to indicate a significant generic
difference something like a different domain.
Something very different to transparency in any case. gif transparency is
off or on and hence left-click like, png transparency is more right click
like.

Once again, I apologise for having described the problem as referring to
objects, it is related to images only.

*------- Additional Comments From (name withheld) 2001-07-03 08:17 -------
Jonathan, unfortunately that is correct behavior.  Just because an image is
transparent at a particular point does not mean it cannot receive click
events
at that point.  Otherwise transparent linked images with nothing behind them
would only work for certain points on the image....  The situation is even
worse
when the image is translucent, not transparent.

The URL that the browser goes to is not at all unexpected--it is displayed
in
the status bar.  I understand that this does not help if the user cannot
read,
but this is a site design issue more than anything else.  A decent design
would
adjust the z-indeces to place the small image above the big image.

Does our behavior differ from that of IE 5.x in any way here?

jonathan chetwynd
IT teacher (LDD)
j.chetwynd@btinternet.com
http://www.peepo.com         "The first and still the best picture directory
on the web"

Received on Wednesday, 4 July 2001 02:13:57 UTC