W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2000

Re: Images of text -- P1 violation or no?

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 11:46:50 -0400 (EDT)
To: Bruce Bailey <bbailey@clark.net>
cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.20.0004131145100.15033-100000@tux.w3.org>
I think you have indeed answered your own question. P1 means it is accessible
- there is a reasonably common work-around. P2 means that it is not difficult
to do the workaround (in very rough terms).

The working group tended to very strict interpretation of the priority scheme
in assigning priorities to checkpoints.

Charles McCN

On Thu, 13 Apr 2000, Bruce Bailey wrote:

  Dear Group,
  
  I have what I initially thought should be an easy question.
  
  Should not using a picture of text (i.e., a .GIF image that contains nothing
  but words) be a WCAG P1 violation?
  
  Checkpoint 3.1 addresses this, but the language is not nearly as explicit as
  it could be:
  <Q>When an appropriate markup language exists, use markup rather than images
  to convey information.</Q>
  
  Even assuming that ALT content is used appropriately, this seems like a VERY
  significant obstacle.
  
  I would make the case that this should be P1 since someone with low vision
  would not be able to read the text since the "use larger fonts" option of
  the UA browser would be effectively disabled.
  
  One could argue that it is only P2 since the person has a couple of work
  arounds (but neither of which are very good):
  (1)  Use screen magnification ($) which, of course, works on graphics as
  well as text.
  (2)  Disable image loading, and use the features of the OS / UA to magnify
  the ALT text content.
  
  I am thinking of the little old lady who might be convinced to use an
  "internet appliance".  Ease of use is a big concern, but even she can handle
  the "bigger/smaller font button"!  Except it frequently doesn't seem to
  work!
  
  Hmmm, I may have answered my own earlier post where I inquired as to if any
  of the P2 checkpoints (aside from 5.3) made a real difference in
  accessibility...
  

--
Charles McCathieNevile    mailto:charles@w3.org    phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative                      http://www.w3.org/WAI
Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053
Postal: GPO Box 2476V, Melbourne 3001,  Australia 
Received on Thursday, 13 April 2000 11:46:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:48 GMT