W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 1999

Re: simple & understandable

From: Anne Pemberton <apembert@crosslink.net>
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1999 15:49:53 -0400
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990618154953.00be1d20@apembert.pop.crosslink.net>
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Mitake, I visited the website below, and think it is a very nice example of
how graphics can make it easier to understand whaat a web page is about.
The products are shown at the top of the first page, so that someone not
interested in such items can move on without wasting time. For someone
interested in the products, the pictures make it easy to select the exact
items needed from those available. The floor plans for the office trailers
and the portable restrooms make is easier to determine if the products suit
the need. The portable restrooms on the page with the standard porta-potty,
provide the shopper with illustrations of a solution that may not have been
originally considered. 

I didn't see any graphics on the site that I would say were "only" for
visual interest. Good choices of graphics were made so that the ones that
are there help to tell the story of the product line of this supplier. I
would easily label all the included graphics as "meaningful", even the
photo of the two company principals. (It's always helpful to eyeball the
people you will do business with).

For Ann Navarro and others who have been asking for examples, I think this
site is a good "first" example of how "meaningful graphics" can make the
information on a web site accessible to those who depend on graphics for
comprehension. It is a good example of what I mean by the term "meaningful
graphics". 

				Anne


At 02:12 PM 6/18/1999 -0400, Mitake Holloman Burts wrote:
>Ok, I know this isn't a particularly complex or pretty website, but I
>wanted to have something a bit more concrete to talk about. I've included
>the URL for a website I did for a commercial customer. They wanted some
>images on the page for "visual interest." They consider their main target
>audience to be construction contractors and people planning special outdoor
>events that need to rent their items. I know that some of the text on the
>pages is not particularly clear due to the client's wish to stick to some
>euphemistic jargon particular to their industry.
>
>http://www.readilite-barricade.com/
>
>My question is: are the images on the pages likely to provide enough of a
>graphical alternative for a non-reader to be able to identify if this page
>is worth their interest? I'm trying to understand what level of information
>needs to be presented. Is it enough to show associated products or images?
>is it a matter of determining if the page is worth the bother of trying to
>understand what it says? what are we trying to say the implications are for
>a small company that wants to establish it's presence on the web? what is
>enough graphics?
>
>Thanks,
>Mitake Holloman Burts
>Raleigh, NC
>
>
Anne L. Pemberton
http://www.pen.k12.va.us/Pav/Academy1
http://www.erols.com/stevepem/apembert
apembert@crosslink.net
Enabling Support Foundation
http://www.enabling.org
Received on Friday, 18 June 1999 16:07:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:44 GMT