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

Re: distraction: bane or content?

From: Marja-Riitta Koivunen <marja@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2001 22:41:12 -0500
Message-Id: <>
To: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>, Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
Cc: WAI <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Should we then have one of these also for all Gestalt and visual perception 
related laws, such as, don't rely on proximity/texture/size/shape alone to 
point out similarities/differencies? Don't rely on good continuation or 
closure alone.

When the image and alt text are alternatives this probably does not matter. 
However, when someone tries to get information of SVG objects in an image 
and how they relate to each other there is probably a difference. And also 
in HTML, if some elements but not all are presented in a similar way, 
should we ask the user to provide class information too so that those not 
able to see the visual cues can still make a connection?

Authors could provide enough semantic information so that users don't have 
to rely on visual presentation. And when they do provide the semantics it 
also becomes easier to change the presentation with stylesheets.


At 12:29 PM 3/9/2001 -0500, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
>Hey, this is good. I like it. Make that man a chair of something! (Oh, he is
>Anyway, This is a good proposal. The other side of the points that the
>feature to stop things wriggling is a User Agent requirement that we expect
>to be met (to a large extent it already is).
>On Tue, 6 Mar 2001, Al Gilman wrote:
>   It would appear that the User Agent guidelines will call for User Agents to
>   give users override control to still squirmy pages.  So the content 
> guideline
>   in this area might be something like the guidelines about color.  "Do 
> not rely
>   on motion alone to draw attention to a featured element."
Received on Sunday, 11 March 2001 22:46:54 UTC

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