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

Re: Textual Images vs. Styled Text, Round Two *ding*

From: Anne Pemberton <apembert@crosslink.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 08:10:58 -0700
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.20000929081058.007aa140@apembert.pop.crosslink.net>
To: WAI Guidelines List <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
At 11:27 AM 9/29/00 +0100, Alan J. Flavell wrote:
>If the "graphical designers" of your quote are more interested in
>achieving their graphical effects than in reaching a wide readership
>for their content, then they are using the wrong medium anyway.

I disagree most emphatically with this statement. The point of using the
web to deliver graphics isn't necessary to reach a "wide readership", but
to reach a segment of the overall web audience. I may create a web
page/site that has a single purpose, to teach a specific lesson to a
specific person or class. In putting the lesson on the web instead of on
paper, I am saying that if the lesson is useful to others, so be it.... but
the design of the site must meet the needs of those intended, not flop
around trying to satisfy some wider audience. 

The reason the web has become popular isn't because it can add bold and
italics to text, but because it can illustrate and allow interaction with
information that goes beyond the limitations of text. People didn't line up
to buy computers to access gopher, but they are to access the web?
Addressing these uses isn't perversion of the web, it's expanding it. 

Graphical designers aren't the enemy, they are the "customers" of the
guidelines. Is it ever good practice to belittle your customers?

				Anne


Anne L. Pemberton
http://www.pen.k12.va.us/Pav/Academy1
http://www.erols.com/stevepem/Homeschooling
apembert@crosslink.net
Enabling Support Foundation
http://www.enabling.org
Received on Friday, 29 September 2000 07:23:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:06 GMT