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


From: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2001 06:03:38 -0800
Message-Id: <>
To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
At 06:59 AM 3/7/01 -0500, Anne Pemberton wrote:
>Remember that what is "distracting" to one person is the very thing that 
>makes a page a memorable experience to someone else

Hence the concept "controllable".

The "hooks to controllability" is another way of requesting semantics from 
authors. Occasionally such can be deduced either from heuristics or the 
essential nature of an element. There are some things authors can do to 
help in this but "just say no" simply will not work.

There are people who think <blink> qualifies as useful and since it's easy 
enough to identify/counteract it needs no special proscription. Animation 
is a bit more iffy in regard to its "distractability index" but just as the 
burden for text-to-speech has traditionally been placed on blind users, so 
"attention-diversion repair" will rest on user agents.

Just my opinion I could (as is often the case) be wrong - but I feel 
strongly that telling authors not to use *certain levels* of distractive 
material is a completely vain tilt at a rather vaporous windmill.

Received on Wednesday, 7 March 2001 09:04:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:36 UTC