- From: <olists@visisoul.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:16:21 -0800 (PST)
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
(snip) >I have only began to reach this conclusion when ironically trying to argue my former case but as I started to code an example taken from poster "Isabelle's" site (hope you don't mind) and found that the true semantically hierarchy quickly became convoluted and hard to follow with the eye, so now I am starting to appreciate the future value of the site map. Not a problem. *grin* Though I'm confused still. Are you saying that my site map is confusing? If that's the case, is it the *whole thing* or just the FYI column and the bottom row of top level links? In other words, if I just left the "portfolio" map, would that map be still confusing? I have used hierarchal links (similar to the dl but actually ul) before (that's not a new concept to me) for a site map but I wanted to be creative (shame on me! hehe) this time around while ensuring that it's universally accesible. I also think the layout of my site map is a bit flawed both visually and by way of code; I'm still working on bringing that up to a high level of quality but I have put it away until my brain can freshen up a bit. In the interim I thought it might be wise to ask the group what they thought since the topic of *site maps* arose. > _Isabelle's Site in a Semantically rich defined list._ > <dl> > <dt>Site Map</dt> > <dd> I thought definitions were deprecated... hrm... I think I might be losing it. :=) Cheers, Isabelle http://www.is.visisoul.com
Received on Tuesday, 10 February 2004 14:16:38 UTC