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

RE: Illustrating Guidelines

From: Emmanuelle Gutiérrez y Restrepo <emmanuelle@teleline.es>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 17:11:52 +0200
To: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@mysterylights.com>, "William Loughborough" <love26@gorge.net>
Cc: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <LPBBIBHMFONPBODMLDAOEEDIDGAA.emmanuelle@teleline.es>


The reading of an image is as complex as the reading of a text.

The images are as not very universal as any other language. To understand a
text in our own language several years we pass in the school learning how to
read, on the other hand, the reading of the image is not a habitual subject
in the schools, it is only given in specialized university courses.

The simplest image can have diverse meanings according to the cultures, for
example, the "esvástica" (the cross gamada) has a very different meaning in
the India and in occident. Also, still being simple an image and being part
of our culture, it is necessary that somebody explains to us what means in
each context, for example, the symbol of a person in wheelschair.

An illustration can be graphic or sound. If the specification of SVG
defines, just as Anne has said, to the illustration like:
"Illustrations (as defined in SVG, for example) consists of lines, shapes,
and colors that can be re-ordered to change the meaning and convey something
That definition is incorrect because, the line, the point, the form and the
color are only elements morphological of the image, graph. Also, it is
necessary to keep in mind that the illustration and the image can also be

As for the illustration of the point 3.6, I believe that the example is very
good for certain cognitive level, but as general example it can discourage
many. I believe that it would be convenient to choose another example. I
believe that it would be more convenient to choose an example of page of the
Public Administration with an administrative language, cryptic for most of
the citizens, and to give the same example with a comprehensible language
for most. Sincerely, if I am looking for information on the war of the
example and encounter a page in which explains to you saying that "The
French were angry with the British in Europe" I leave to another page
because evidently the level is too low.

Would it be possible to establish a cognitive level exigible, starting from
which is advisable to create a special version for those that don't reach
it? That is to say, What cognitive problems or what problem degree is it
necessary that the developers keep in mind and starting from which should it
be considered cases that require special attention?.

 Kind regards,

-----Mensaje original-----
De: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org]En
nombre de Anne Pemberton
Enviado el: jueves, 10 de mayo de 2001 13:11
Para: Sean B. Palmer; William Loughborough
CC: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Asunto: Re: Illustrating Guidelines

I'm trying to reconcile to the notion that text is repurposable but
illustrations are not. I'm not seeing the distinction.

Letters and words in text can be reused in any variety of situations,
changed and re-ordered to change the meaning and convey something
different. But so can illustrations. Illustrations (as defined in SVG, for
example) consists of lines, shapes, and colors that can be re-ordered to
change the meaning and convey something different.

If by "repurposable" you mean the fact that if a user has some fancy
equipment, they can have the text read to them as well as reading it for
themselves, this is interesting, but since the equipment is not universally
available, I'm not sure that text is really all the repurposable. For most
users, the text is available in just one format, typically visual.

It may be true that this group is unique in not "needing" illustrations,
but there have been difficulties in communicating the needs outside the
group. Why? Because it isn't illustrated? Perhaps.

Does the fact that we have only worked in text before mean that we have to
continue the same way? No, I didn't spend the time showing that
illustration is possible and useful just so folks could say, "that's nice"
without changing their thinking or action. In this instance, I have used
the illustrations in two purposes - the first, to make the meaning of the
guidelines more understandable, and the second to demonstrate the utility
of illustrations in general.

I have been very surprised that there has been no discussion about the
content of any of my illustrations.


Anne Pemberton

Received on Thursday, 10 May 2001 11:09:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:37 UTC