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

Re: ftf in Linz success criteria

From: jonathan chetwynd <j.chetwynd@btinternet.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 23:54:56 +0100
Message-ID: <00b401c23109$a40a7290$723f29d9@RJCHETWYND>
To: "john_slatin" <john_slatin@forum.utexas.edu>, "Jim Ley" <jim@jibbering.com>, "Lisa Seeman" <seeman@netvision.net.il>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

The problem you pose applies equally well to alt text.
ie how much description is sufficient?
It is not for us to decide, rather the author and user to negotiate.

thanks
jonathan
----- Original Message -----
From: "john_slatin" <john_slatin@forum.utexas.edu>
To: "'jonathan chetwynd'" <j.chetwynd@btinternet.com>; "Jim Ley"
<jim@jibbering.com>; "Lisa Seeman" <seeman@netvision.net.il>;
<w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Sent: Sunday, July 21, 2002 10:50 PM
Subject: RE: ftf in Linz success criteria


>
> Jonathan, screen readers don't *create* text equivalents: they only report
> those that a human author composes.
>
> In another message, you contended that it would be possible to create
visual
> equivalents for nearly "all messages."  I'm not clear what "message" means
> in this context.  I'm also not clear about the granularity-- the level of
> detail at which you'd like the requirement for visual equivalents to
apply.
>
>
> Thanks!
> John
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: jonathan chetwynd [mailto:j.chetwynd@btinternet.com]
> Sent: Saturday, July 20, 2002 7:56 PM
> To: Jim Ley; Lisa Seeman; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
> Subject: Re: ftf in Linz success criteria
>
>
>
> Undoubtedly some of the creation of non-text equivalents might be created
by
> user agents, much as screen-readers currently do.
>
> In the meantime, there are very good reasons for asking authors to provide
> resources they may have available.
>
> jonathan chetwynd
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jim Ley" <jim@jibbering.com>
> To: "Lisa Seeman" <seeman@netvision.net.il>; <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 12:33 PM
> Subject: Re: ftf in Linz success criteria
>
>
> >
> > Lisa Seeman:
> >
> > > -supply an illustration for each instruction
> > > - create a non text equivalent for all textual content.
> >
> > Are these two equivalent? (well the second contains the first.)
> >
> > Do you have a definition of what an "instuction" is?
> >
> > How many "non-text equivalents" should you include for each
text-content?
> > ie is including just audio sufficient, if so why? if not how many
> > equivalents do we provide?
> >
> > Is there a summary of discussion at the f2f to avoid us having to go
over
> > well discussed topics?
> >
> > > let the debate begin......
> >
> > :-)
> >
> > Jim.
> >
> >
>
>
Received on Monday, 22 July 2002 02:09:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:19 GMT