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

Re: Checkpoint 3.4 again

From: Anne Pemberton <apembert@erols.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 08:35:26 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>, Jason White <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
Cc: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

         Starting with the first checkpoint, I like the checkpoint used, 
but would broaden it to say: For any descriptive unit of text, provide a 
graphic equivalent.

Then on to the techniques .....

At 04:13 AM 7/30/01 -0400, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
>proposed checkpoint
>For any description of a process or of relationships, provide a graphic
>Techniques stuff...
>1. Use case: A description of how to decide whether someting is conformant to
>Method: Draw a flowchart
The way this reads, I was uncertain if you are going to illustrate the 
description with the flowchart, or what.

Suggestion for rewording "Method":

         Method: Illustrate with a flowchart of the steps  to conformance. 
Insure that the flowchart is readable on the screen when it is viewed as a 

>2. Use Case: Describing a network
>Method: represent the original in RDF and use an RDF to image service to
>generate an image
>A textual explanation (of sorts): http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG-access/#Structured
>The RDF is incorporated in the SVG version of the image:
>There is a gif/png version too:
>The resulting diagram (generated from the RDF - doesn't matter if the
>existing image is there or not):

Again, the method seems not to say what needs to be said. What do you think 
of this?

Use Case 2: Describing a Network

Method: Include a diagram showing the network. The accessibility of  the 
diagram is improved if the image is created in SVG.

Then on with the examples ....

>3. Use Case: A recipe for cooking a pavlova
>Method: provide step by step drawings of a process

I may some helpful words to the method here:

Method: Illustrate with step by step drawings or pictures showing the key 
steps in how to cook a pavlova.

>4. Use case: A description of how to plait a stockwhip or belt
>Method: provide a movie demonstrating how to do the process

And here, to be consistent:

Method: Illustrate with a movie demonstrating how to plait a stockwhip or belt.

>5. Use case: A description of how to make a medieval-style tent
>Method: Provide illustrations of the key steps

And again, to be consistent:
Method: Illustrate the key steps in making a medieval-style tent.

>Proposed checkpoint:
>For any page which has a 'concrete thing' as a primary topic, provide a
>graphic illustration of that thing.
>'concrete thing' is often what the term 'concrete noun' means in grammar - a
>person, an animal, a plant, a product. It can also stand for a class of
>concrete things - cats, birds, computers, mountains, hotel rooms.
>Success criteria:
>1. A person who is familiar with the thing recognises the illustration as a
>reference performing a "key topic identifier" function. AND
>2. A person who reads the page understands the topic that the picture is
>* Provide a photo of a person on a page about them.
>* Provide a photo of a product on a page about it.
>* Provide an outline or stylised drawing of a cat on a page about cats. This
>will help to identify that this is not a particular cat, but cats in general.
>* Provide a stylised image of a TV for a Television guide.
>* Provide a stylised image of a bus or train for a bus or train timetable.
>* Use clip art images made for the purpose. (Don't break copyright)
>* Use a stylised representation for discussing networks.
>* Use a stylised representation of sporting equipment (e.g. a football, a
>    hockey stick, a bicycle)

This is good, but let me try organizing it a different way, to include 
finer distinctions of helpful media.

Method: Illustrate the main topic with photos, simple or stylized drawings, 
clip art (Don't break copyright) or multi-media including sound 
files.  Provide photos, when available, of specific persons, places, 
events, and specific things, such as products, etc. and provide outlines or 
stylized drawings on a pages about the generic people, places, events and 
For example,
         *on a generic page about cats, use an outline drawing to 
illustrate the topic, but if the page is about your cat Snow, put photo/s 
of Snow on the page.
         * on a page with a television guide, use a drawing to stylized 
image of a TV to illustrate the topic of the page
         * on a page discussing networks, use a stylized representation of 
the specific network, and an clip art or icon to represent generic networks.
         *on a page discussing a music, include a background sound 
illustrative of the topic. (Again, Don't break copyright) and when possible 
a photo, simple or stylized drawing of the topic of the song, if relevant.
         *on a page with words to the song include a background sound file 
of the tune, and when possible, include an appropriate graphic illustrating 
the words or topic of the song. Example: 

>This will help a person whose dissablity makes reading difficult to undertand
>whether the content of the page is reated to the topic they are intersted in,
>and therefore to decide if it is worth the effort of reading the entire page.
>Why is this better than existing checkpoints:
>Because it identifies success criteria, techniques, and circumstances when it
>should be applied.

It is also better than existing checkpoints because it actually pinpoints a 
basic need and addresses it head on ... <grin>

>Proposed checkpoint:
>For a page that deals with an organisation or concept for which there is a
>well known symbol, include that symbol on the page.
>Success criteria: as for preceeding proposal.
>* Use a national flag
>* Use a corporate logo (beware of copyright/trademark!)
>* Use music notation fragments as a symbol for music. (Jonathan Chetwynd has
>    an example - or I can make one)
The third technique isn't related to this checkpoint. That belongs 
somewhere where we address the use of standard icons and symbols for 
generic stuff and specific stuff ...  maybe under topical illustrations, 
but more likely under something else.... It needs to be somewhere, along 
with suggestions on universal icons for e-mail and other stuff that happens 
on lots of pages ...

>Rationale as above.

Charles, You did a wonderful job, better than I could have muddled through 
from scratch. Jason, I will probably use Charles' model to create my own 
proposal for these issues. That should move us a bit closer to compromise 
or consensus. I'll toss it into my thoughts as I'm driving to a bunch of 
chores this afternoon.


>Charles McCN
>On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Jason White wrote:
>   Checkpoint 3.4 currently reads:
>   "Use multimedia to illustrate concepts."
>   The corresponding checkpoint in WCAG 1.0 (checkpoint 14.2) read as
>   follows:
>   "Supplement text with graphic or auditory presentations where they
>        will facilitate comprehension of the page."
>   In order to move this discussion forward, please indicate:
>   a. Whether you are satisfied with either of the above formulations.
>   b. If not, please provide a proposal that includes the following
>   information:
>   1. Your preferred alternative wording for checkpoint 3.4.
>   2. Your rationale (why you think your proposal is better, whom it
>      would benefit, and why you think it would benefit them).
>   3. Success criteria: what would a web content developer need to
>      accomplish in order to meet the checkpoint.
>   Unless those who are interested in this issue start providing concrete
>   proposals of this kind, I suspect the discussion will continue to
>   reiterate the disagreements and give rise to the confusions which have
>   characterised it up to this point.
>Charles McCathieNevile    http://www.w3.org/People/Charles phone: +61 409 
>134 136
>W3C Web Accessibility Initiative     http://www.w3.org/WAI  fax: +1 617 
>258 5999
>Location: 21 Mitchell street FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia
>(or W3C INRIA, Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, 

Anne Pemberton

Received on Monday, 30 July 2001 08:44:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:38 UTC