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

"equivalent alternatives" etc.

From: Hansen, Eric <ehansen@ets.org>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 14:36:51 -0500
To: "'w3c-wai-au@w3.org, w3c-wai-ua@w3.org'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, >
Message-id: <A12997152E36D31187A4000077893CFB01209287@rosnt46.ets.org>
I believe that ATAG uses the term "equivalent alternatives" while UAAG uses
the term "alternative equivalents". I think that if both documents intend
the same thing, they should use the same term.

I think that neither term has been solidly defined.

I am not sure what to make of these terms. Keep in mind that according the
the WCAG definition of "equivalent" already includes the notion of it being
"alternative". The equivalent is an alternative way of providing the
function.

Perhaps some of this can be hashed out in connection with the discussion of
multimedia....


From WCAG 1.0:

"Equivalent"

"Content is "equivalent" to other content when both fulfill essentially the
same function or purpose upon presentation to the user. <EMPHASIS>In the
context of this document, the equivalent must fulfill essentially the same
function for the person with a disability (at least insofar as is feasible,
given the nature of the disability and the state of technology), as the
primary content does for the person without any disability.</EMPHASIS>"

===========================
Eric G. Hansen, Ph.D.
Development Scientist
Educational Testing Service
ETS 12-R
Princeton, NJ 08541
609-734-5615 (Voice)
E-mail: ehansen@ets.org
(W) 609-734-5615 (Voice)
FAX 609-734-1090
Received on Thursday, 16 December 1999 15:08:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:01 GMT