W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2002

RE: rationalize presentation [was: Use consistent presentation]

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 15:17:14 -0500 (EST)
To: Geoff Deering <gdeering@acslink.net.au>
cc: <kynn-eda@idyllmtn.com>, Slaydon Eugenia <ESlaydon@beacontec.com>, <gian@stanleymilford.com.au>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0201201515430.23976-100000@tux.w3.org>
Having pictures of the text and the real text should meet the requirement
(having pictures and alt text does not) but technically fails the checkpoint,
and in my very personal opinion is ugly enough to be worth avoiding...


On Sat, 19 Jan 2002, Geoff Deering wrote:

  This is basically my question too.  As I read Checkpoint 3.1; "When an
  appropriate markup language exists, use markup rather than images to convey
  information" (Priority 2).

  I take this to mean "use markup rather than gifs, jpegs, etc when
  representing anything in text form".  And this could be expanded to use SVG
  instead of GIFs & JPGs (when the technology is mature and widespread

  That's how I interpret this checkpoint and priority 2 compliance.  Would
  appreciate an enlightened view on this to correct me if this is not so.

  Geoff Deering

  -----Original Message-----
  From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org]On Behalf
  Of kynn-eda@idyllmtn.com
  Sent: Wednesday, 16 January 2002 6:30 PM
  To: Charles McCathieNevile
  Cc: Slaydon Eugenia; gian@stanleymilford.com.au; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
  Subject: Re: rationalize presentation [was: Use consistent presentation]

  > I think we agree. I didn't mean to say "don't use navigation icons", I
  > to say "use navigation icons, and text. But for the text, use real, styled
  > text, not gif or jpg images of text".
  > cheers
  > Charles
  > On Tue, 15 Jan 2002, Slaydon, Eugenia wrote:
  >   I still have to disagree. Navigation icons provide visual clues that CSS
  >   just can't duplicate yet. Saying that they are inappropriate in an
  >   accessible page is a harsh statement. I fully support your first
  >   of providing both icons and text labels. I feel that it best supports
  >   accessibility for *all* users.

  Charles, what about using navigation icons which contain gif or jpeg
  images of text, and also supplying text links as well?  The quality of
  text effects you can get in CSS is woefully limited, thus reducing the
  types of designs available to use.  However, having both highly
  stylized gif/jpeg text _and_ text-only, scalable-size text links lets
  you have your cake and eat it too, if we are talking about a single
  UI/document model.


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, France)
Received on Sunday, 20 January 2002 15:18:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:40 UTC