W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > April to June 2004

Re: AUWG Teleconference on Monday, 21 June 2004 - Minutes

From: Jan Richards <jan.richards@utoronto.ca>
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 09:20:35 -0400
Message-ID: <40D983A3.90400@utoronto.ca>
To: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Cc: 'Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG' <rscano@iwa-italy.org>, 'Karen Mardahl' <karen@mardahl.dk>, 'List WAI-AUWG' <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>

Gregg,

I'm concerned that outsiders will hold WAI documents to a higher 
accessibility standard (e.g. use our work as exemplars). Even if we 
decide that a more official solution (such as a common WAI strategy for 
creating non-text alternatives in our documents) is not necessary, I 
would still like to run our descriptions, etc. past members of your 
group as part of the review process.

Cheers,
Jan


Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:

> The rule I always use is... if I were on a phone call -- or existed in an
> audio world - how would I present the information.  
> 
> I just describe as much as is necessary to make the point. 
>  
> Gregg
> 
>  -- ------------------------------ 
> Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
> Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
> Director - Trace R & D Center 
> University of Wisconsin-Madison 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-wai-au-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-au-request@w3.org] On Behalf
> Of Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG
> Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2004 5:34 AM
> To: Karen Mardahl; "karen@mardahl.dk"@hydra.securehosting.dk; 'List
> WAI-AUWG'
> Subject: Re: Re: AUWG Teleconference on Monday, 21 June 2004 - Minutes
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Karen Mardahl" <karen@mardahl.dk>
> To: "Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG" <rscano@iwa-italy.org>;
> <"karen@mardahl.dk"@hydra.securehosting.dk>; "'List WAI-AUWG'"
> <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2004 10:34 AM
> Subject: SV: Re: AUWG Teleconference on Monday, 21 June 2004 - Minutes
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Roberto
> 
> It's my understanding that what Jan specifically wanted to ask WCAG
> about
> was - how to describe the red circles. E.g. sighted and non-sighted
> people
> could be discussing an illustration and a sighted person says something
> like
> "the red highlighted part is good", making a visual comment that the
> non-sighted person is not aware of. So I think we are looking for advice
> on
> how best to write these longdescs. Where is the fine balance between not
> too
> little and not too much? And how can we encourage good authoring of a
> longdesc?!
> 
> Roberto Scano:
> All depends if blind people are blind since they was born or if they
> become blind. Btw, every blind knows what means "circle".
> I wanna suggest to leave only longdesc and remove [d] link that create a
> ripetition of links with the same link title and these are no good for
> accessibility throught screen readers (and, btw, we have "deprecated"
> them in WCAG 2.0 HTML Techniques).
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Jan Richards, M.Sc.
User Interface Design Specialist
Adaptive Technology Resource Centre (ATRC), University of Toronto

   Email: jan.richards@utoronto.ca
   Web:   http://jan.atrc.utoronto.ca
   Phone: 416-946-7060
   Fax:   416-971-2896
Received on Wednesday, 23 June 2004 09:21:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:39:49 UTC