Nope......
And the reasons why not are?
Well, if you're building websites in 1997, I guess there's no reason not to.
Aside from that, you're talking bloated code, large image downloads, a pain in the ass to update, and no navigation whatsoever if the image fails to load.
Image maps serve a purpose and to not use them simply because it's "old hat" actually goes AGAINST the "semantic coding" philosophy, where the object of the exercise is to use the correct concept (or element) for the purpose it was intended.
Yes, I accede on that, perhaps the snobbery is implied rather that any real "one upmanship" attitude.It's a well thought out position based on the same best practices you subscribe to...perhaps delivered with just a slightly snobbish undertone.
<h2></h2>
h2:before { content: 'Header 2'; }
speaking of semantic coding and separating content and style. I'm a little perplexed with a situation such as
HTML:<h2></h2>
Clearly this is content within CSS, and although I can see some usage benefits of doing so, is it actually wise to do this?Code:h2:before { content: 'Header 2'; }
speaking of semantic coding and separating content and style. I'm a little perplexed with a situation such as
HTML:<h2></h2>
Clearly this is content within CSS, and although I can see some usage benefits of doing so, is it actually wise to do this?Code:h2:before { content: 'Header 2'; }
The question I have is about some of the new CSS3 effects. Many if not most are used solely for interaction, which should be JS...