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

Re: Problems with OTACS-2 (history, past and future)

From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2001 20:14:18 -0500
Message-Id: <200110290200.VAA1100251@smtp1.mail.iamworld.net>
To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
At 06:39 PM 2001-10-28 , Anne Pemberton wrote:
>         Unless you count e-mail readers as early browsers, there was no 
>beginning of Internet hyperlinking before images were included ... but do 
>correct me if my memory is faulty ....

I'll correct you, only because I lived through that history.  The discrepancy
in your memory is a technicality that doesn't matter for what we do going
forward to future history.

As a matter of sharp-pencil auditing of historical fact, you don't have to
count email readers as early browsers.  There was the line-mode browser that
Tim published first.  

You memory is not faulty, however, it is just imprecise.  There was a text
Internet for a long time, and an non-GUI Web briefly, before the
Web that consumers know now simply as Internet.  But none of that matters. 
What you remember is what matters. 

The explosive growth of the Web, where Internet became de_rigeur for home
personal computers, and Internet access sold computers to lots of people who
never would have bought them otherwise, came after, and presumed, the GUI
integration of web browsing.

There was both Internet and Web before the GUI integration; but users today
mostly signed up assuming what has been there was after the integration, and
they have no need to care that there was a history beforehand.

Knowing what we do about the needs of people with disabilities, we do care
the integration is carried forward in a robust way that transforms gracefully
between service delivery contexts where the GUI is an accelerator and where it
is not.  This is not trying to go back to where there weren't pictures in any
way.  It is trying to re-engineer the way the integration is carried out so it
is more flexible across the growing diversity of delivery environments.  There
was a big bang of desktop usage spurred on by the Webbed Internet.  But the
desktop is losing its monopoly on Internet access and continued business
as well as the quality of service delivered to people with disabilities will
hang on maturing a more polished and flexible integration of the elements of
the medium.


>         Good news that SVG is progressing past vaporware! It is still not 
>an easily-available option for a page author, especially one who does not 
>have a pioneering sense about digital design ... Anyone who uses SVG on 
>their page needs to provide a link to download the viewer if they don't 
>want to frustrate users with a blank screen ...
>         Unless you count e-mail readers as early browsers, there was no 
>beginning of Internet hyperlinking before images were included ... but do 
>correct me if my memory is faulty ....
>                                                 Anne 
>At 11:02 AM 10/28/01 -0500, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
>>This is simply untrue. Cognitively disabled users who are looking for
>>animated content have every reason to prefer SVG over other formats, or at
>>least every reason that can be advanced for using flash.
>>SVG is not vapourware, it works in animated form now using a readily
>>available plugin, it works in at least two static form that supports
>>accessibility features.
>>To make general handwaving assertions about how hard things might be is not
>>helpful. We need to assess the technologies available, and the solutions
>>can provide, and then what is on the horizon that we should think about in
>>order to provide a better solution as the technology improves.
>>Otherwise we would be using text-only browsers.
>Anne Pemberton
Received on Sunday, 28 October 2001 21:00:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:39 UTC