I've been working on creating a template for locator maps for use in the element articles at http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium .
The trouble is that much of the feedback I've been getting about the locator maps is that users' first instinct is to use the image as if it were an image map (clicking on the position for helium for example and expecting to be brought to that article). And the feedback I've gotten is from old-hand Wikipedians who know our standard image behavior.
I could forgo the image and have an HTML table embeded in the element's table but the perio HTML table is huge (15,000+ bytes of text) even without the element names and symbols (I'm also not sure it would render correctly).
Q: Is it desirable to have image maps? Would having image maps in some places (like the element locator maps) be confusing when they are not available in others (such as geographic maps)?
It would be neat to have this ability but I'm not sure if it would be desirable given our current non-standard image behavior (that is, clicking on the image brings you to the image description page).
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
Daniel Mayer wrote:
Q: Is it desirable to have image maps? Would having image maps in some places (like the element locator maps) be confusing when they are not available in others (such as geographic maps)?
They would be *wonderful* for geographic maps as well.
Some thoughts:
* An image map must never be vital content, so editors need to provide a second set of links (or an indirect link to a list). Ie, two sets of things to maintain.
* Like tables, image maps are inherently complex -- shape styles, sets of coordinates, links, perhaps alt text per link. We can steal the HTML syntax exactly, or try to come up with something cleaner.
* Image maps are likely to be shared over many articles, either with the same image or over a group of related images (ie, 58 maps of California, each with a different county highlighted; 100-odd periodic tables, each with a different element highlighted). Thus, it _might_ be useful to have the maps in a magic namespace, which could be linked from the image description page -- thus, one image map can be cleanly shared over many almost-identical images, in any articles that link the images.
(Custom style sheets could be similarly treated with a magic namespace, as I believe has been occasionally suggested.)
Just thoughts...
It would be neat to have this ability but I'm not sure if it would be desirable given our current non-standard image behavior (that is, clicking on the image brings you to the image description page).
That's another concern, but something could probably be worked out.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
I just looked at the page, and the image is too large for my 800x600 screen. It breaks the layout in the table, so "H" has moved down to roughly where "Na" is.
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org