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

Re: WHat makes Icons accessible or not?

From: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 06:44:42 -0700
Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20010501064048.0336f640@mail.gorge.net>
To: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>, WAI GL <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
At 04:36 AM 5/1/01 -0400, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
>I wonder if people candraw any ideas that explain which ones are good, and 
>why / why not.

IMO the second one in example 1 and the first one in the other examples are 
the best.

Using other versions of the "editing" icon with their small deviations will 
be lost in small icons, which will all look about the same. Also true for 
the "pencil" ones. The film camera for multimedia might be too archaic too 
soon but could also actually become an "icon".

Whatever gets used most becomes the standard so that the famous "trash 
basket", "scissors", and "home" get to be iconic through proliferation 
rather than pertinence.

Keep on keeping on and "the market will decide".

--
Love.
                 ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE
Received on Tuesday, 1 May 2001 09:43:33 GMT

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