- From: Kevin McDonagh <info@appletv.co.uk>
- Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2004 08:36:10 +0000
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
I'm going to have to side with the view that the site map is inevitably dated. Jesper touched a good point where the site map seemed like the best solution to explain to users the semantic structure of a website but to add another tag to to the mix does not seem to make any sense. I use Semantic maps to show the layout in full to clients but thats it, normal users do not visualise their position in the layout of a website rather they just feel like they are making their own natural progression through a text. When a table of contents is the standard in all other literary texts why make another one for the web? After all the purpose of web accessibility is to create universal standards. > >I haven't seen one to the extent that when I see the term site map I think >of a cleanly formatted list of (nearly) all the pages on the site. This >differs from my concept of a table of contents in its level of completeness >and its like design obfuscation. > >What I understand by site map is desirable. It is not needed for small sites >designed by people who respect accessibility, but I think it might be >undesirable to remove the requirement, as it is often the only way of >navigating typical commercial sites, and establishing a precedent for its >removal in some cases may well cause it to be dropped in cases where it >is valuable (even now it is typically a small print link at the bottom of >the page and is probably there because they want search engines to be able >to navigate the site, even if humans can't). > > > -- Kevin McDonagh Apple Tv Design info@appletv.co.uk http://www.appletv.co.uk
Received on Monday, 9 February 2004 03:36:00 UTC