W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > January to March 2001

fwd: Re: Quick Tips, question

From: Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 14:41:41 -0500
Message-Id: <>
To: EOWG <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
Am forwarding this w/ Gretchen's permission, and my comments interspersed

>From: "Gretchen Lowerison" <gretchen@hwg.org>
>Organization: HTML Writer's Guild
>To: Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>
>Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 19:39:54 -0500
>Subject: Re: Quick Tips, question
>Reply-to: gretchen@hwg.org
>Priority: normal
>X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c)
>I prefer the card with the "the" and "element" included.  The reason 
>is that although the purpose of the card is to serve as an 
>educational tool for those who wish to apply the WAI standard we 
>cannot assume that these people will be familiar enough with coding 
>to immediately recognise noframes and map as elements.
>I realise that there are people groaning now ;-)

There may be some groans but I think it's worth it to think this thing
through clearly.

>Pretend that you are only somewhat familiar with HTML.  Now read the 
>Frames.  Use noframes and meaningful titles.
>Does this mean that we should not use frames?
>(yes, more groaning!)

Good point -- noframes could be read as a typo, and if it were considered a
typo, the implications would be pretty bad: it would be misinterpreted to
mean that we are against the use of any frames, which is not the case. I
think this is a very important point. 

>By saying use the noframes element it is clear beyond doubt.


>I have handed out many, many of these cards and, in most cases, the 
>cards were distributes to people who had only a passing knowledge of 
>HTML but wanted to know more.  I think that the second example is 
>I am fine with the first example as well but prefer the second.
>On 22 Jan 2001, at 14:01, Judy Brewer wrote:
>> EOWG:
>> Comments welcome through early Tuesday morning (January 23) US EST.
>> In our meeting last Friday we briefly re-discussing one issue regarding the
>> updated Quick Tips order. 
>> For reference, the current tips text is at 
>> 	http://www.w3.org/WAI/References/Quicktips/
>> We'd had an internal request for a small printing change: to change "map"
>> and "noframes" which are currently boldface, small caps on the card, to
>> boldface, lower case, since in XHTML it is incorrect to list element names
>> in upper case. 
>> Turned out to be more complicated than expected. When proofing the new
>> version, it became apparent that differentiating the element names in only
>> one manner -- by boldface -- looked somewhat like a typo, in that it did
>> not stand out enough.
>> In our meeting last Friday 
>> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/2001/0119-eowg-min.html
>> we discussed four options for resolving it:
>> 	1. add the word "element" after MAP and NOFRAMES -- problem is that it
>> breaks layout
>> 	2. drop small caps to lowercase and leave bold -- problem is that doesn't
>> stand out
>> 	3. change font for code-type -- monospace serif, such as courier
>> 	4. leave as is -- problem, internal dissension.
>> We decided as first choice to go with a code-font change, and if that did
>> not work, to leave it as is.
>> However I went over this with our printer & with our internal
>> communications folks and got some new information: 	
>> 	- The code-font looked even more out of place. 
>> 	- We got an internal rule-out on leaving the card as is, since it would be
>> inconsistent with XHTML which has been out for a year now.
>> 	- The printer managed to make the "element" word fit on the line, but then
>> we realized that by adding that word, we also needed to add a "the" before
>> the word before element (yet another ripple effect of a "simple" change to
>> the card). He then made a word-wrapping fit on the front of the card.
>> That's not to say it will fit on the translated cards though.
>> 	- He also pointed out that on the card itself, the boldface was quite
>> prominent, and therefore might be a sufficient distinction even without
>> small caps. However, other parties here felt that the language use would be
>> inconsistent without "element" on the card.
>> I know that some of you would like not to comment further on this. However,
>> if you do, here's the question: 
>> 	- Please look at the following proofs (these are temporary URI's only!!!
>> do not bookmark!! and these are for visual inspection only -- the "alt" for
>> the cards is that one set is exactly the same as the text on the current
>> QuickTips page, and the other one has "Use the client-side map element and
>> text for hotspots" and "Use the noframes element and meaningful titles.")
>> http://www.skymedia.com/wai/ 
>> 	- Any comments pro or con on the use of "the... element" on the card sets?
>> William's message on Saturday notwithstanding, unless I get strong comments
>> favoring "the... element" I plan to go with the simple boldface lowercase
>> "map" & "noframes" only, since adding "element" etc seems to just
>> exacerbate the clunkiness of the card.
>> - Judy
>> -- 
>> Judy Brewer    jbrewer@w3.org    +1.617.258.9741    http://www.w3.org/WAI
>> Director, Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) International Program Office
>> World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
>> MIT/LCS Room NE43-355, 200 Technology Square, Cambridge, MA,  02139,  USA
Judy Brewer    jbrewer@w3.org    +1.617.258.9741    http://www.w3.org/WAI
Director, Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) International Program Office
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
MIT/LCS Room NE43-355, 200 Technology Square, Cambridge, MA,  02139,  USA
Received on Tuesday, 23 January 2001 14:44:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:55:48 UTC