W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > October to December 1997

RE: webwatch-l What To Do About .gif Files

From: Kelly Ford <kford@teleport.com>
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 1997 08:30:51 -0800
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19971201083051.006b980c@mail.teleport.com>
To: "Charles (Chuck) Oppermann" <chuckop@microsoft.com>, "'Al Gilman'" <asgilman@access.digex.net>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
At 01:44 PM 11/25/97 -0800, Charles (Chuck) Oppermann wrote:
>Step back for a moment and ask yourself - "Why do they use an image in the
>first place?"  It's apparent to me that the image of the coupon is taken
>directly from the electronic pre-press the newspaper is using.
>
>Does anyone honestly believe that a free service will pay someone to read
>and type in the thousands of lines of text that appear in the coupons?
>Especially since the newspaper has already paid someone to enter the
>information initially into their pre-press system.
>
>Looking at just one coupon for "Arco."  There are two maps, 4 separate
>coupons, 6 corporate logos and (I'm guessing here) over a hundred words.
>That's just one entry that might have a lifetime of a week.
>
>If LONGDESC= was available, in this case, no one would take the time
>required to put the information in.  Access is not access if it's
>prohibitive to implement.

Having the most accessible web browser won't do a bit of good if the
content isn't readable.  What would be nice is for some of the content
developers to get on board the accessibility campaigns.  But individual
letters from people probably aren't going to convince them of this so I
wonder what might be done.  Is there an arm of the web accessibility
efforts that reaches out to content developers like the Orange County
Register?

Authoring tools certainly should automate the process of making accessible
texts as much as possible.
Received on Monday, 1 December 1997 11:33:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:38 GMT