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

class definitions and grouping - example 1

From: Marja-Riitta Koivunen <marja@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2001 09:31:28 -0500
Message-Id: <4.2.2.20010312090459.01640c00@localhost>
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
I often use the definition below for images and their captions. I though it 
enhances accessibility and makes it easier to change styles.

When Jose saw it he asked if Amaya should help to produce that to enhance 
accessibility. Using the same classes consistently sounded like a good idea 
and I promised some checkpoints to back this practice up.  When I carefully 
rechecked the guidelines, the only thing I could find was 12.3 . Guideline 
3 and 13 somehow support this, but there are no checkpoints that I could 
apply to this.

So should we say something more explicit or is it that there are no 
accessibility benefits in doing this and I should stop?

<div class="figure" id="Fig-1">
<p><img src="architecture.png"
alt="Basic architecture showing the communication between the client and 
the annotation servers."></p>

<p class="caption">Figure 1: The basic architecture of Annotea.</p>
</div>

Marja
Received on Monday, 12 March 2001 09:42:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:09 GMT