W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2006

RE: perceivable structures

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 14:51:01 -0600
To: "'Tim Boland'" <frederick.boland@nist.gov>
Cc: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <019201c637f1$b0a22460$ee8cfea9@NC6000BAK>
Hmmm

Looking for a single word or a couple so we can use it in place of perceive.


 

First one fits but is pretty long

The other two mean something different than perceive.   Understanding is
beyond perception for example. 

 

It is a tough one. 

 


Gregg

 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 
The Player for my DSS sound file is at http://tinyurl.com/dho6b
<http://tinyurl.com/cmfd9>  

 

 


  _____  


From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Tim Boland
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 10:36 AM
To: Gregg Vanderheiden
Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: RE: perceivable structures

For "perceive" - How about "to become aware of directly through the senses",
"to take notice of", or "to achieve understanding of"?

Thanks and best wishes
Tim Boland NIST

At 09:35 AM 2/22/2006 -0600, you wrote:




Well,

 

We could use another word for perceive but we decided that we wanted to
stick with perceive because is was sensory agnostic.   Still you make a good
point Tim.

 

Hmmmm.  Got another word for perceive or a short definition of it we can
plug in?  

 


Gregg

 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 
The Player for my DSS sound file is at http://tinyurl.com/dho6b
<http://tinyurl.com/cmfd9> 

  

  


  _____  


From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Tim Boland 

Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 9:16 AM 

To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org 

Subject: Re: perceivable structures 

The proposed definition seems somewhat "circular" to me - "perceivable"
defined in terms of "perceived" 

Maybe change proposed definition to:

"relationships in the content that are (objectively?) noticeable (through
the user's senses) from the default presentation"?

Thanks and best wishes 

Tim Boland NIST

 At 02:28 AM 2/22/2006 -0600, you wrote:




This definition seems backward. 

perceivable structures 

relationships in the content that are necessary to perceive the organization
of the content. 

I think it needs to be 

perceivable structures 

relationships in the content that can be perceived from the default
presentation. 

RATIONALE 

What we are trying to achieve is to make sure that any relationships that
are obvious from the presentation are also obvious when looking at the
markup.  

Yes? 



  

Gregg

------------------------ 

Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 

Professor - Depts of Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr. 

Director - Trace R & D Center 

University of Wisconsin-Madison 

<http://trace.wisc.edu/> FAX 608/262-8848  

For a list of our list discussions http://trace.wisc.edu/lists/ 

The Player for my DSS sound file is at http://tinyurl.com/dho6b 

 <http://trace.wisc.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/> 



  
Received on Wednesday, 22 February 2006 20:51:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:42 GMT