Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Usability/Clickable images

message: The following users are participating in this project:
* surueña (talk)
* —Quiddity
* — Omegatron 15:16, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Participants

message: Template:ClickA is very similar to , but it creates an external link instead of an internal one. It is only used as a shut-down button for bots. I think this can be easily fixed creating another template named  or something like that which sole purpose is to create an extremely big "shut-down" red link, and thus being totally accessible (not as pretty, but more intuitive than a red circle). --surueña 17:10, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template:ClickA 

message: Template: has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. --surueña 21:09, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  TfD nomination of Template:{{ucfirst:Wikisourcesmall}} 

message: Template: has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. --surueña 21:09, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  TfD nomination of Template:{{ucfirst:Noclick}} 

message: I'm still working on how to fix the articles using template:click to put text links over an image (for example, template:sefirot). This can't be fixed without using a similar CSS hack, so I think we need something new. I was thinking in a new extension like m:EasyTimeline, but is this extension accessible? Can the created imagemaps be easily read by a screen reader? For example, using lynx I can't read the years in office of the first example of m:EasyTimeline#Charts examples, only the surnames of the Russian presidents. I was thinking to ask the original developer of EasyTimeline to make a similar extension for "clickable maps", but other ideas are also welcomed. Best regards, --surueña 22:34, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: M:EasyTimeline isn't accessible and I brought this up at Wikipedia talk:Accessibility # Timelines?. Therefore it can't be used as a replacement. I read on the Wikitech mailing list that someone had come up with a new image syntax that could do what  does now. I don't know how that's progressing. In my opinion  is the lesser of two evils in that it will give all the required information (plus more garbage), but the timelines won't give enough. I would rather get extra garbage than miss out on what a sighted person sees. Graham87 03:37, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see... so we also need to fix EasyTimeline (like if we haven't enough work... :-) I will think a little more about this... Thanks! --surueña 09:30, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Solution for diagrams and maps

message: The main problem I have with  is the garbage it produces; not all screen readers read the Wikipedia CSS, mostly because of performance issues. Therefore in my case with JAWS 5.1, I get the image description read three times - the first and third time with a link to the image description page and the second time with a link to the page that is linked in the template. I can find the link just fine but the caption shouldn't be displayed three times for those using non-CSS browsers. I'm not sure how to modify the main page to acknowledge this fact - template:click is still usable, but there is a lot more extraneous text if browsing Wikipedia without CSS support and this extraneous text is confusing. Graham87 07:14, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  My problem with Template:Click 

message: Will the ImageMap extension be a viable replacement for ? It's recently been added to MediaWiki and it's enabled on Wikipedia. I wouldn't have a problem with it as long as descriptions are used sensibly (i.e. they describe the image in a straightforward way). Graham87 07:08, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe not at this very moment, see Extension talk:ImageMap for the problems with it. Graham87 07:28, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, this can be used to implement "related portal" links.  It just can't be used in templates right now.  Rather than removing  from portals, an alternative such as using ImageMaps must be implemented to keep the functionality.  It's not okay for someone to go in and remove  and not set up an alternative. --Aude (talk) 14:11, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See Portal:Criminal justice/Related portals for how this is implemented.  --Aude (talk) 14:12, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds much better in screen readers than the use of . I just hope the bugs on Bugzilla relating to the extension can be fixed soon. Graham87 14:26, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, this is a big step, I didn't know anything like that was currently enabled. However, IMHO it still presents overlinking, but this accessibility problem is by far minor compared to the situation before where some pages where completely inaccessible. I will start to understand how to use it! --surueña 17:13, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Notice about this discussion has been posted on the Village pump.  I was not aware of mass removals were about to happen.  Was this discussed before on Village Pump?  I think broader input on alternatives is required and when  is removed, an alternative must be set up in its place. --Aude (talk) 14:43, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I didn't know that changes like that should be discussed in the Village pump. I had planned to discuss there the changes needed to MediaWiki:Monobook.css, and I even proposed to move the discussion to the Village pump when a wikipedian show his objections about the project, however he showed no further interest although the project was stopped due to his objections. I have a posted the complete story in the Village pump. Sorry again, but the ImageMap extension changes everything. --surueña 16:57, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See WP:DISCUSS.  I mean no disrespect, but this change affects hundreds of pages.  People should be aware and make sure there is some consensus on a course of action.  Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) is also a good place to post, so that you get input from people most familiar with the technical aspects of Wikipedia and can help find alternatives. With ImageMap, I think we have a solution that people would be agreeable to. --Aude (talk) 17:07, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extension:ImageMap 

message: Until this project has consensus, please do not make mass removals of this template to portals or anything else. pschemp | talk 16:14, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It has consensus. — Omegatron 20:00, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Where?--- Safemariner 21:45, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

text: This project is an example of a group of people imposing their will on the whole of wikipedia because of their personal tastes and opinion.  Projects like this give Wikipedia a bad name --- Safemariner 21:37, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The vote for deletion to that template was clear: it has too many problems and should be deleted but "by no means can one admin and one TfD fix this issue", so this project was created because it was too much work for one admin. Maybe this project should have be first discussed in the Village pump, now I know that, but we haven't imposed anything: the project was stalled when one wikipedian complained about it. Best regards, --surueña 17:07, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Mass template removals to portals