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

Re: F2F notes for discussion of illustrating text checkpoint

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2002 21:27:04 -0500 (EST)
To: Wendy A Chisholm <wendy@w3.org>
cc: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0203302118070.12351-100000@tux.w3.org>
In the reference below you suggest that putting an originally unillustrated
document online means you don't have to illustrate it. I disagree. I don't
think that there is any justification for suggesting that the original was
accessible, and therefore there is no justification for suggesting that a
version of it on the Web will be accessible.

In order to make smomething accessible, it might be necessary to provide
further information. (text equivalents for chart data are as much an example
of this as visual illustrations of a set of instructions).

There may be cases where the author decides that something should not be
changed or added to in any way, for whatever reason. This decision has
nothing to do with whether or not people can use the original content, and
does not in any way render a checkpoint inapplicable.

just my 2 cents worth.


On Fri, 29 Mar 2002, Wendy A Chisholm wrote:

  2. Illustrating text
  quick summary:
  what are common uses of illustrations already in use on the web, what are
  some possible technological solutions, and what needs to be considered when
  creating illustrations?  This is more of an outline of the things to
  consider than of solutions.  It feels like a techniques document rather
  than success criteria for a checkpoint, but they are issues I thought would
  help us design success criteria.
Received on Saturday, 30 March 2002 21:27:04 UTC

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