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

Re: media mix and universal connectedness

From: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001 07:48:05 -0700
Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20010916073149.037781d0@localhost>
To: Anne Pemberton <apembert@erols.com>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
At 09:06 AM 9/16/01 -0400, Anne Pemberton wrote:
>Provide image equivalents for text

A question remains not so much about whether this can even be done - for 
example the instant sentence might have as its "image equivalent" some 
depiction of an author pasting an "appropriate" image next to the words 
"provide image..." - but more as to whether authors can be expected to be 
able to do that. I could not do it effectively. Am I therefore excluded 
from the game?

I can write some text, as I am now doing here, but I have neither 
time/skill/talent to "provide image equivalent" for this very text. If I 
put this email exchange on a Web site about the problems of complying with 
guidelines, I could not comply with this guideline therein.The notion that 
this can be expected/required/done is IMO totally vain.

In my heart/mind I know that such multi-modal reinforcements of messages 
would mostly work IF DONE APPROPRIATELY, but I cannot do it. Just the 
simplistic effort at
http://rdf.pair.com/xguide.htm
(wherein I used "free icons" and sound snippets) was a major undertaking 
for what seems a trivial result.

Do the icons or earcons help? I dunno. They certainly aren't "image 
equivalents for text", they merely decorate, hopefully evocatively.
To conform to the proposed checkpoint I would have to become someone I am 
currently not and I would thereby be prohibited from "eating my own dog 
food" insofar as putting a conformance logo on this page.

--
Love.
EACH UN-INDEXED/ANNOTATED WEB POSTING WE MAKE IS TESTAMENT TO OUR HYPOCRISY
Received on Sunday, 16 September 2001 10:45:25 GMT

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