One of the 2 objections, I'd say. But the second is probably a matter of implementation. SVG makes it unclear what's the actual active area when navigating through tab key.
2015-03-25 19:32 GMT+01:00 Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalm...@gmail.com>: > On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 10:03 AM, Andrea Rendine > <master.skywalker...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Instead, we start by figuring out what problems need solving. > > Which is what has been done for this subject, I guess. > > PROBLEM: image maps, intended as "shaped link areas related to specific > > regions of an image" are a fairly requested feature. Unfortunately, as > > current solutions are not responsive and they can't fit to how images are > > defined in a modern scenario, with scalable size and art direction, > authors > > have looked for workarounds, script-enhanced or non-native (Flash maps) > > solutions. > > POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS: 1. link boxes and CSS, 2. SVG, 3. <map>, where > > 1. CSS has a poor range of shapes > > 2. See above for SVG > > 3. <area> coordinates are absolutely defined. > > PROPOSAL: As SVG map is not viable at all in complex <picture> scenarios, > > and not easily viable in simple contexts, authors could benefit from > <map> > > versatility. So a viable solution *could* be to improve a feature in > order > > to make it responsive. > > The "Map element improvement consortium" is not an organisation I want to > > mindlessly support (basically because it doesn't exists). And > unfortunately > > I tend to be verbose when I start writing. So in my last message I tried > to > > make it shorter and I chose terms incorrectly. > > Note that we *should* just be able to use <picture> in SVG, which > helps that solution. This is generally useful (we want responsive > images inside of SVG, too), and afaict, removes the only objection to > SVG. > > ~TJ >
