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

Re: Just what you wanted a new check piont

From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 09:14:35 -0700
Message-Id: <a05010406b702197fea9c@[10.0.1.2]>
To: "Lisa Seeman" <seeman@netvision.net.il>, "WAI" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Sounds too specific to be a full checkpoint but would be a good
technique/technology-specific-solution (right term?) for a broader
checkpoint.

The basic principle here is "provide enough information to allow
full communication."  Would this also apply, e.g., to being asked to
supply furigana (hope that's the right word) to Japanese Kanji?

I forget if we have a specific checkpoint for that basic principle.

Dumb question, why are the vowels usually omitted in Hebrew and
Arabic?  What is the cultural basis for doing so?  Not sure I understand
_why_ this happens.

--Kynn

At 9:49 AM +0200 4/17/01, Lisa Seeman wrote:
>Vowels-
>Vowels for Hebrew, Arabic and the like, are usually omitted in web 
>pages. (I do not know if Unicode even supports it). With out vowels, 
>the reader has to guess the sounds, usefully relying on visual 
>memory. Most people can do this with out thinking.
>Most people do not include people without a visual memory 
>(non-sited, low-sited, learning disabled....)
>It also excludes cognitively disabled, and the semi literate who are 
>struggling to overcome social-economic problems and 
>immigrants............................ 
>Needless to say I think that this should not be acceptable.
>Can we add a checkpoint that vowel information should be included ?

-- 
Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com>
http://www.kynn.com/
Received on Tuesday, 17 April 2001 12:20:16 GMT

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