- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 12:29:22 -0400
- To: Philip TAYLOR <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
- CC: public-html@w3.org, David Poehlman <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>
Philip TAYLOR wrote: > That is a rather rude observation, Boris : if (as I believe) > David is unable to see what he types, his speech synthesiser > may well render "president" as aurally indistinguishable > from "precedent". Interesting. That had not occurred to me, since in fact they are quite aurally distinguishable in all the pronunciations I've heard. If there are others of which I was not aware, I apologize. > > [A]ll authors [1] must be forced (whether by civil laws or by > authoring specifications) to produce only content that is accessible to > all users [2]. > > No, not "forced". "Required", "expected", whatever. These are different things, though. I can accept "required", but "expected" is not the same thing at all (should vs must in RFC-speak). I stand by my statement that this is not a reasonable requirement. I do think it's a reasonable expectation. > then no-one is planning to "force" that user to do otherwise, I have heard several proposals that the spec require all UAs, including graphical ones, not provide any rendering for <img> elements that lack @alt. So I'm not sure your statement is correct. Not that I think these proposals are going to go anywhere, but "no-one" is a stretch. -Boris
Received on Sunday, 24 August 2008 16:30:12 UTC