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

RE: New rewrite of Guideline 1.1 (action item)

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 22:32:07 -0500
To: "'Joe Clark'" <joeclark@joeclark.org>, "'WAI-GL'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <auto-000002369653@spamarrest.com>

I think there is much to your comments Joe.  That is why it is level 3 -
which is for people who want to go all the way.  

In being complete - do we want to include things like this -- or leave them
out (even at level 3) and not address that group at all. 

So far we have erred on the side of including it -- but only at level 3


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

-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Joe Clark
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 8:58 PM
Subject: RE: New rewrite of Guideline 1.1 (action item)

> 1.  For multimedia content, a separate text document is provided
> (similar to a play script ) that includes both descriptions of all
> important visual information and  transcripts of dialogue and other
> important sounds.

I know Andrew W.K. is really hot on this even though WGBH itself does not
do it, but we have no evidence whatsoever-- none-- that actual deaf-blind
people find these combined transcripts actually useful. Plus, no matter
what our friends down the highway from Cape Cod tell us, they are
fantastically difficult to prepare. I know of a whopping two examples. 


    Joe Clark | joeclark@joeclark.org
    Accessibility <http://joeclark.org/access/>
    Expect criticism if you top-post
Received on Monday, 21 June 2004 23:32:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:49 UTC