W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > July to September 1999

Re: disparity in quicktips and guidelines?

From: <thatch@us.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 12:56:57 -0500
To: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
cc: Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>, WAI GL <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, Robert Neff <robneff@home.com>
Message-ID: <852567A9.00634170.00@d54mta08.raleigh.ibm.com>


RN: Hmmm, why are image maps Priority 3?  When I turn graphics off, all i see
is the main alt tag for the graphic.  Since text links are required, I   would
have thought a develpoer must require text links for image maps and   therefore
would be Priority 1.

JT: Alt text for client side maps (areas) is priority 1. Alternative text links
is priority 3 because those areas are generally accessible today. Look at
www.ibm.com/sns which has a map across the top. All alt text is displayed in IE
with images off, and spoken with screen readers and text browsers. Even without
alt text, Lynx, HPR, and others will at least expose the URL's.  Your comment
seems to be talking about server-side maps - where you would get one alt text.
Not using these or providing alterntive text links is priority 1.

Jim Thatcher
IBM Special Needs Systems
www.ibm.com/sns
thatch@us.ibm.com
(512)838-0432



Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org> on 07/09/99 11:48:45 AM

To:   Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>
cc:   WAI GL <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, Robert Neff <robneff@home.com> (bcc: James
      Thatcher/Austin/IBM)
Subject:  Re: disparity in quicktips and guidelines?





thread transferred from Education and Outreach Group...

In general it was felt that if a problem was easily handled by Lynx, which is
freely available for every platform I know of, then it could be regarded as
an improvement rather than an important barrier.

In light of the disucssion about non-readers in particular, I suspect that
decision should be reviewed.

Charles McCN

On Fri, 9 Jul 1999, Judy Brewer wrote:

  Robert,


  You may want to ask this question in the Web Content Guidelines Working
  Group. I recall they had very specific reasons for being able to
  downgrade the priority of 1.5, but can't articulate that well right now.


  I've put it on the list of things to look over in revising the
  guidelines-- they're getting the list too.


  Judy


  At 12:01 AM 7/9/99 -0700, Robert Neff wrote:

  >>>>

  <excerpt>Do i see a disparity between the Web Content Accessibility
  Guidelines (WCAG) and Quicktips?



  WCAG 1.5 states, "Until user agents render text equivalents for
  client-side image map links, provide redundant text links for each active
  region of a client-side image map. [Priority 3] "



  Hmmm, why are image maps Priority 3?  When I turn graphics off, all i see
  is the main alt tag for the graphic.  Since text links are required, I
  would have thought a develpoer must require text links for image maps and
  therefore would be Priority 1.



  Quicktips state "Image maps. Use client-side MAP and text for hotspots."
  Shouldnt we add text redundant links?  I was using this for a while and
  then re-realized that text links are needed - turn off graphics!



  comments?



  once we are finished reviwing this comment, can pass over to the GL.


  </excerpt><<<<<<<<




  ----------

  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, 545 Technology Square, Cambridge, MA,  02139,  USA


--Charles McCathieNevile            mailto:charles@w3.org
phone: +1 617 258 0992   http://www.w3.org/People/Charles
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative    http://www.w3.org/WAI
MIT/LCS  -  545 Technology sq., Cambridge MA, 02139,  USA
Received on Friday, 9 July 1999 14:04:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:00 GMT