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

Re: media mix and universal connectedness

From: Anne Pemberton <apembert@erols.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 09:06:35 -0400
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20010916072522.009ffd60@pop.erols.com>
To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Al, yes, we can agree on that much.

         Now, how to say so in the guidelines clearly and unambiguously ... 
Do we address it in an existing or new checkpoint in guideline 1, or do we 
leave it only suggested by confining it to guideline 3?

         Play with re-wording this ....

         1.6 Provide image equivalents for text. (Note: an image of text is 
not an equivalent for text)
Clearly associate the image equivalent to the text in the structure of the 
document (is this doable? In CSS? elsewhere?). When an image is too large 
to associate with the text, use a small version of the image on the 
document linked to the full-sized version.

         I did not include sound files as an equivalent for text, although 
they can function that way, I don't think sound meets needs as well as 
images .... (I am not referring to sound from speech readers, but sound 
files on documents).

                                         Anne

At 06:11 PM 9/15/01 -0400, Al Gilman wrote:
Can we agree on the following?

>We are all in this together.  We can only all be connected if we use both
>words
>and pictures to connect.  Leave out either, and you have left out someone.
>
>Is that the gist from the perspetive of the business of this group?
>
>Al
>
>At 04:15 PM 2001-09-15 , Anne Pemberton wrote:
> >Al,
> >
> >         This is my first attempt at coherent discussion since the events
> >this week, so if I don't express myself well, please excuse ....
> >
> >
> >         Yes, I know that text is "re-purposable" by being representable
> >visually, by sound (with special equipment), and in braille (with special
> >equipment), but as unspecific as images and real-life visual experiences
> >are, they are an important means of communication for many people. On
> >Tuesday, when our nation was attacked by horrific terrorists, I was able to
> >access only text until I got home from school and could see tv ... which
> >was when I realized that my sister who lives in Pittsburgh had been
> >vulnerable, and got offline to call her .... Another sister heard the news
> >on the radio at school and groaned so deeply her students asked her what
> >was wrong, and she said that Christy was in Pittsburgh ... We got a
> >directive from our new superintendent to limit any "human" need to know
> >what is happening on our part, and limit the exposure of our students to
> >graphical images of the horror .... to limit the trauma that are happening
> >to the children who saw their parents killed from the windows of their
> >classrooms ..... images are what brought Americans together this week ....
> >with words and text, but mostly images ..... think about it! Text didn't
> >happen online until long after all events had transpired!
> >
> >                                                 Anne
> >
> >
> >At 08:32 AM 9/15/01 -0400, Al Gilman wrote:
> >>This is not to say that the objective is not symmetrical.  Text is not
> >>logically the foundation, experience is.  But more indirect
>representation by
> >>means of encoded verbalisations about experience turns out to be more
> >>repurposable in the field today that a more direct emulation of visual
>sensort
> >>experience.
> >>
> >>Al
> >
> >Anne Pemberton
> >apembert@erols.com
> >
> ><http://www.erols.com/stevepem>http://www.erols.com/stevepem
> ><http://www.geocities.com/apembert45>http://www.geocities.com/apembert45
> >

Anne Pemberton
apembert@erols.com

http://www.erols.com/stevepem
http://www.geocities.com/apembert45
Received on Sunday, 16 September 2001 09:41:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:13 GMT