- From: Anne Pemberton <apembert@erols.com>
- Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 10:36:11 -0500
- To: Adam Victor Reed <areed2@calstatela.edu>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Excellent point! After we specify that illustrations should be there, we can tackle helping authors determine how to do it well ... Anne At 07:01 PM 3/29/01 -0800, Adam Victor Reed wrote: >I joined this list recently, so please be gentle with me if this is >a topic that was already discussed here. > >Non-text illustrations (particularly in instruction manuals, or on web >pages that deliver the user interface of a hardware, software, or >service system) often contain many details that are not relevant to >the task at hand. This irrelevant content will distract or disable >some users, and will slow down, to the point of interfering with >productivity, many more. I remember (from my days at Bell Labs) a >documentation guideline to use line drawings, with relevant >information only, rather than photographs (which tend to include >irrelevant detail) as illustrations in technical manuals. > >Two questions: > >1. Is minimizing irrelevant detail something that should be explicitly >included in the (upper case G) Guidelines? > >2. Is this a valid concern with respect to checkpoint instructions? >For example, should one be concerned that the "all" in "a text >equivalent for _all_ non-text content" will lead developers to include >irrelevant elements of illustrations in the replacement text? >-- > Adam Reed > areed2@calstatela.edu > >Context matters. Seldom does *anything* have only one cause. > > Anne Pemberton apembert@erols.com http://www.erols.com/stevepem http://www.geocities.com/apembert45
Received on Friday, 30 March 2001 11:49:36 UTC