W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2000

online Dictionary.....

From: Jonathan Chetwynd <jay@peepo.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2000 09:01:59 -0000
Message-ID: <003301bf6e26$1d70af40$16499fd4@signbrowser>
To: "Dick Brown" <dickb@microsoft.com>, "Scott Luebking" <phoenixl@netcom.com>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

I am currently looking for a www dictionary that produces a one sentence
'My first dictionary' response without banner ads, frames.. and not
childish.

No phonetics, no alternate meanings except gross ie
mine:     belonging to me
mine:    a deep hole

Possibly providing a short list of similar sounding words eg
dear:    a loved one
deer:    a four legged animal with antlers

Surely in a civilised society this is a simple and popular necessity.
Ideally this should be incorporated in the current page without a refresh.

http://dictionary.com                                              Too many
banner ads, and a little too verbose
http://www.goldendome.net/Tools/WebSter            No banner ads, much too
verbose

If you think you have seen something suitable please forward to me.

jay@peepo.com

Jonathan Chetwynd
Special needs teacher / web accessibility consultant
education and outreach working group member, web accessibility initiative,
W3C
----- Original Message -----
From: Dick Brown <dickb@microsoft.com>
To: 'Jonathan Chetwynd' <jay@peepo.com>; Scott Luebking
<phoenixl@netcom.com>; <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2000 9:37 PM
Subject: RE: An article about Yahoo's simplicity of design


> Jonathan Chetwynd wrote on Tuesday, February 01, 2000 9:18 AM:
> >>you might like to consider that some folks actually cannot read and
Yahoo
> is
> a real mess for them.
>
> Jonathan, are you talking about people who are illiterate or those for
whom
> text is difficult to comprehend? (And maybe those two can amount to the
same
> thing.)
>
> Dick Brown
> Program Manager, Web Accessibility
> Microsoft Corp.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Chetwynd [mailto:jay@peepo.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2000 9:18 AM
> To: Scott Luebking; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
> Subject: Re: An article about Yahoo's simplicity of design
>
>
> I am not quite sure where you got this from however www.google is far
> cleaner and the results suit me. try peepo as keyword and compare results.
> you might like to consider that some folks actually cannot read and Yahoo
is
> a real mess for them.
> If you care to visit www.peepo.com you will see graphics attempting to
> convey information. It is not perfect, nor finished. The first page will
> have subject areas similar to yahoo but graphical.
> I understand your meaning but it does not take into account the needs of
> people with cognitive disabilities
> tx
> jay@peepo.com
>
> Jonathan Chetwynd
> Special needs teacher / web accessibility consultant
> education and outreach working group member, web accessibility initiative,
> W3C
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Scott Luebking <phoenixl@netcom.com>
> To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2000 3:43 PM
> Subject: An article about Yahoo's simplicity of design
>
>
> > Yahoo as design champion
> >
> >
> > David Strom Special to The Daily Yomiuri
> >
> > Have you noticed that more and more Web sites are looking like the home
> > page of Yahoo these days? What started out as subtle satire
> > (naughty.com), then turned into portal envy (Excite, Netscape, Lycos and
> > others) now has become a full-fledged Web designer's template
> > (word.com). What is going on here?
> >
> > Well, the simple and basic reason is that Yahoo's home page is very
> > simple and basic. It is easy to navigate, it doesn't take too long to
> > load on even the slowest connections, and it just works well. Anyone,
> > even my daughter, can grasp what to do and where to go within a few
> > seconds of seeing it appear in a browser. Yahoo's home page doesn't have
> > much in the way of fancy graphics, has no spinning objects or scrolling
> > bars of information or other visual pollution. For the most part, it is
> > just text and a few small graphics, and on a plain white background too.
> >
> > Word.com's head designer talks about selling out his design principles
> > and just going with what the majority of visitors want. In a letter
> > posted on their Web site last month, he actually apologizes to his
> > readers and his authors (running older browser versions) who were unable
> > to view his pages because of his fancy designs and cutting-edge
> > technologies. I think this is a historic first and notable for the Web.
> >
> > The Web has gone full circle, from a place in 1995 that didn't even
> > contain any graphics at all (remember the text-based browsers such as
> > Lynx?) to a new visual art medium in 1997 to today's homogenous world
> > where text once again is king. And I couldn't be happier.
> >
> > I avoid places on the Web that require Shockwave to navigate their sites
> > as well as places that put navigation links inside graphics on their
> > home pages. Why should I take the time to download this junk when I have
> > other, more pressing things to do with my surfing time? So the
> > Yahoo-ization of the Web is a good thing, not because I like the Yahoo
> > design but because the message of ease of use is finally getting through
> > to Web designers. And we will all be better off as a result, since we
> > can get to where we want to go without waiting for the graphics to stop
> > spinning or scrolling and just be able to concentrate on the text.
> >
> >
>
Received on Thursday, 3 February 2000 04:09:46 GMT

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