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

Re: reading vs. writing

From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 16:59:19 -0700
Message-Id: <a04320400b5d74474f98c@[207.218.50.86]>
To: David Poehlman <poehlman@clark.net>, Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org, jonathan chetwynd <jc@signbrowser.org.uk>
At 12:08 PM -0400 9/2/00, David Poehlman wrote:
>this was somewhat my point but when reading media, we usually refer to
>it as assimilation of text? To put it another way, how can an animation
be read aloud?

Ah, but you seem to be including "aloud" in the phrase above.  There's
no guarantee that "reading" can be directly translated into "aloud"
in English usage -- "reading" is an input action, and "aloud" is an
output action, so "reading aloud" is a composite action.

An animated gif can be -read-.  Reading it -aloud- is a different
matter and depends more on the ability to vocalize than it does
on the ability to read.

--Kynn

-- 
--
Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com>
http://www.kynn.com/
Received on Saturday, 2 September 2000 20:10:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:49 GMT