W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2001

RE: use of the "d" link for images

From: Graham Oliver <graham_oliver@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 23:36:03 +0100 (BST)
Message-ID: <20010425223603.62289.qmail@web10002.mail.yahoo.com>
To: Jamie Mackay <Jamie.Mackay@cultureandheritage.govt.nz>, "'David Poehlman'" <poehlman1@home.com>, Jeff Isom <jeff@cpd2.usu.edu>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Hey Jamie
I really like the way that you have done things, any
reason that you chose to leave out colour references?

Cheers
Graham
--- Jamie Mackay
<Jamie.Mackay@cultureandheritage.govt.nz> wrote: >
Here is an example of what (I think) David is
> talking about:
>
http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/dnzb_exhibs/lit/index.htm
> 
> I tend to use both D links and Longdesc tags (though
> this provokes a bug in
> Bobby which complains about repeating the link
> phrase.) Hopefully one day I
> will be able to get rid of all the D tags, but in
> the meantime I use link
> titles to describe them. I don't think just
> "description of previous image"
> or something is adequate though is it? - surely the
> description should refer
> to the specific image if the link is going to be
> read out with a bunch of
> others?
> 
> Jamie Mackay
> 
> 
> The second question is what form it should take.  I
> preffer telling
> people what is being described such as: "description
> of web access
> symbol".
> another approach is to write a separate page and
> provide a link such as:
> "descriptins of images on this page".  on the
> separate page, you can
> write the descriptions and title them accordingly. 
> you can even do this
> any way and use d links to call up the appropriate
> portions of the page
> but this does not always work.
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeff Isom" <jeff@cpd2.usu.edu>
> To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2001 4:55 PM
> Subject: use of the "d" link for images
> 
> 
> I understand the purpose of the "d" link is to
> provide the user with a
> description of a complex graphic.  Should all images
> have "d" links or
> only
> those that are complex?  In other words, although a
> description of an
> image
> may not be essential to the content of the site,
> would it be a good idea
> to
> give the user and opportunity to experience the
> graphic in a more
> meaningful
> way?
> 
> In addition, it seems that using the "d" tag could
> be confusing to the
> user
> if there were a number of complex graphics on the
> page.  As the user
> tabbed
> throught the links they would hear "link d" . . .
> "link d" . . . "link
> d".
> They would have to work to figure out what image the
> link refers to.  I
> know
> this is convention for describing images, but is it
> the best approach?
> 
> Jeff
> 
> -----------------------------------
> Jeffrey Isom
> Instructional Designer
> Web Accessibility in Mind (http://www.webaim.org)
> Center for Persons with Disabilities
> Utah State University
> Logan, Utah   84322-6800
> (435) 797-7582
> 


=====
<Start Signature>
'Making on-line information accessible'
Email: graham_oliver@yahoo.com
Phone: 64-9-360-1261
<End Signature>

____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie
Received on Wednesday, 25 April 2001 18:36:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:54 GMT