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

Re: Problems with OTACS-2

From: Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 02:04:27 -0000
Message-ID: <019501c1601f$8b8534a0$aa3c70c2@7020CT>
To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
>"Al Gilman":
>What is being debated here IIRC is: suppose the author does use SVG -- is
>placing an unreasonable burden on the users?  Is modifying the browser to
>process SVG illustrations a reasonable expectation on users, or is this
>unreasonable expectation for certain groups of people with disabilities
and we
>need an alternative approach for them?

I was trying to think wider than just SVG and 3.4, what level of
plug-in/non "standard" equipment[1] is an author allowed to use to fulfil
a requirement, users should go some way (and most do of course), so is it
okay to require a plug-in?  and if so, any plug-in, free plug-ins only,
free but on restricted platform/O/S? - What is reasonable?  - I'm not
sure.  I think users have to have some responsibility, and if they can
install a plug-in at low cost, then that should be an ok (minimum you can
do), but not recommended way of fulfilling the requirement.

Received on Sunday, 28 October 2001 21:14:17 UTC

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