W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2004

RE: Example: Real-time feed of satellite photos

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Wed, 5 May 2004 08:58:23 -0500
To: "'WAI WCAG List'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <auto-000027454770@spamarrest.com>
I think the answer comes from our 'scoping' approach which allows you to
specify which parts of your site conform at what levels. (see decision from
about 3 weeks ago).

 

Regulators may want to specify that specific parts of a site or specific
types of content conform to level but our current approach is that our
guidelines do not.    

 

We may later have a doc which makes suggestions on issues like this - but we
do not currently have this as part of our guidelines per recent discussions
and decisions. 

 

 
Gregg

 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 

  _____  

From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Donald F. Evans
Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 8:34 AM
To: WAI WCAG List
Subject: Re: Example: Real-time feed of satellite photos

 

This is similar to the problem I face at AOL.  How does a content aggregator
conform to these standards?



John M Slatin wrote on 5/3/2004, 11:41 AM: 

I received the following inquiry from someone who works at a state agency
here in Texas.  It presents an interesting challenge, and it seems like
something that might furnish a good example for us. I'm also curious to know
what solutions members of WCAG WG would propose in order to meet WCAG 2.0.

 

<begin query>

Our agency receives satellite photographs of Texas that are automatically
formatted into jpegs and loaded to our Web site. These images are real-time,
from one-hour to about 12-hours old. These are continually and automatically
updated on the site.

I have an opportunity to review these Web pages now because they are being
revised to add additional types of satellite photos. It's my job to make
recommendations regarding the content's usability and whether it meets state
Web site accessibility standards. 

On these pages, the user selects up to four different parameters (using drop
down lists) and then clicks a "display image" button. A jpeg is returned to
them in their browser. 

Since these images are automatically updated, alt text specific to each
photo can not be added. And I'm not really sure how they could be
descriptive enough, anyway. Besides, the photos are not presented inside Web
pages, they are just the jpeg files.

The state rule says we should provide an alternative format for pages that
are not accessible. I don't think that is possible in this case. Would you
suggest some disclaimer text on the page stating that these images are not
accessible?

</end query>

 

Thanks!

John


"Good design is accessible design." 
Please note our new name and URL!
John Slatin, Ph.D.
Director, Accessibility Institute
University of Texas at Austin
FAC 248C
1 University Station G9600
Austin, TX 78712
ph 512-495-4288, f 512-495-4524
email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu
web  <http://www.utexas.edu/research/accessibility/>
http://www.utexas.edu/research/accessibility/

 

 
Received on Wednesday, 5 May 2004 09:58:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:29 GMT