W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2001

Re: what type of document do we want?

From: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2001 08:26:22 -0700
Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20010404080400.00a7d180@mail.gorge.net>
To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Cc: humanity@atlas.co.uk, <seth@robustai.net>, sean@mysterylights.com, <aswartz@upclink.com>, oedipus@hicom.net
At 06:38 AM 4/4/01 -0400, Anne Pemberton wrote:
>http://users.erols.com/stevepem/guidelines/whitehouse.html

Right on.

Just as WAI has spawned a new industry of "accessibilizing" the Web you've 
created a huge demand for designers to provide the now-doubled effort to 
make all this stuff *truly* accessible. And the key is to have a checkpoint 
saying something like "provide appropriate illustrative adjuncts to all 
content" - which of course includes icons/earcons/illustrations.

I am not being sarcastic when I say that what you propose here is likely to 
be what many of us will be doing for some time to come. Anyone herein who 
has done any of the proposed illustrational decisions/implementations/tests 
knows that until there are widely accepted icons (like the "speaker" to 
indicate a sound resource - does it have a musical note if it's not just 
talk?) and earcons [might also need hapticons?], there are countless 
meetings/conferences/seminars to make a fully "ideophonohaptographic" 
presentation both i18n and WAI compliant.

This universality cannot be imposed from some centralized hierarchical 
entity as was attempted with Esperanto or Bliss Symbols - and in our time 
English.

Multimedia is not just a plaything to be used for selling deodorant pads, 
it is a key to universal communication.

Helen Keller lives!

--
Love.
                 ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE
Received on Wednesday, 4 April 2001 11:26:18 GMT

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