- From: Loretta Guarino Reid <lguarino@Adobe.COM>
- Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 11:56:53 -0700
- To: Wendy A Chisholm <wendy@w3.org>
- cc: gv@trace.wisc.edu, "GL - WAI Guidelines WG (E-mail)" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, lguarino@Adobe.COM
Since I'm new to this group, this may be ground that has been covered in the past. When we discuss text, is there an implication about the encoding that will be used? Must text be presented in, or easily translated to, Unicode? Or is this a technology-specific issue? Loretta > > >ITEM 3 > > > >Under Guideline 1.1 we talk about talking about a text equivalent for all > >non-text. I would like to somehow get in here the idea that this needs to > >be electronic text. Text by itself cannot be translated into any form but > >electronic text can. Again, since we are talking about very general > >principles, I would like to eliminate right off the bat anyone thinking that > >putting a painted image of text on the screen solves the problem. Remember > >that we are talking about many different formats and not just talking about > >html. There maybe a wide variety of technologies in the future used to > >representative information. The key here is that it be electronically > >readable. Therefore, suggest that 1.1 be changed to. > > > >"1.1 provide (an electronically readable) text equivalent for every non-text > >(auditory or graphical) component or multi-media presentation". > > I did not make this edit. I would like to know more about the "wide > variety of technologies in the future used to representative > information." I am concerned that these are all electrons and that > "electronic text" is not the best clarification and actually may confuse > people. > Loretta Guarino Reid lguarino@adobe.com tel: +1 408 536 2166
Received on Wednesday, 16 August 2000 14:57:33 UTC