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

RE: Publishing Tools and accessibility guidelines

From: HARRIS Rachel D <rachel.d.harris@co.multnomah.or.us>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 09:53:51 -0800
Message-ID: <D1F67895BD07D211981F00805FBBB55A01C6C1EC@jj_exch.co.multnomah.or.us>
To: "'Charles McCathieNevile'" <charles@w3.org>
Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Thanks Charles for your response.  I definitely think that dealing with
things "head on" is ok, yet agree that being demanding and confrontational,
generally holds progress back.  Is there a way I can help in your efforts or
vice versa?  I feel obligated to not let this pass without some action on my
part.
Rachel

~*~* ~*~
Rachel Harris, M.S., L.P.C., N.C.C.
Multnomah County Department of Community Justice
Web Site Coordinator
501 SE Hawthorne Blvd Suite 250.  Portland, OR 97214
Phone- (503) 988-6048  Fax-(503) 988-3990  TDD-(503) 248-3561
INTEROFFICE MAIL: B503/Suite 250
Rachel.D.Harris@co.multnomah.or.us
http://www.co.multnomah.or.us/dcj/
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~



		-----Original Message-----
		From:	Charles McCathieNevile [mailto:charles@w3.org]
		Sent:	Sunday, February 18, 2001 7:32 PM
		To:	HARRIS Rachel D
		Cc:	w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
		Subject:	RE: Animated GIFs and accessibility
guidelines

		Well, I try to avoid going "head-to-head" with people, since
as I understand
		it that means the sort of confrontational approach where
neither side is
		intersted in giving ground. But I have, as part of my work
in the Authoring
		Tool Accesibility Guidelines Group, spent time engaging in
what I hope is
		productive dialogue with some of the Publisher Team, among
others at
		Microsoft. So have their own accessibility deaprtment, as I
understand
		things.

		Part of the reason why the Authoring Tools group is looking
for organisations
		who are publicly prepared to say "we want to buy things that
meet the highest
		possibe conformance to ATAG" is that this provides a lever
that can be used
		by engineering teams who have to negotiate their priorities
with marketing
		departments and various other parts of an organistation. (Or
can be used by
		marketing departments as a lever when etc...)

		(If anyone from Publisher is reading this, I am happy to
come back and look
		some more at things that can be done, as I am generally to
talk to
		developers of Authoring tools).

		Cheers

		Charles McCN

		On Fri, 16 Feb 2001, HARRIS Rachel D wrote:

		  As I spent hours and hours trying to resolve ADA issues to
be able to post a
		  newsletter created by someone in Publisher, I came across
this site that
		  added SALT to the wound.
	
http://www.microsoft.com/office/using/weblife/publisherdemo.htm
	
<http://www.microsoft.com/office/using/weblife/publisherdemo.htm> .  They
		  are bragging about how easy and wonderful it is, yet they
don't even have a
		  simple "alt" tag built in when they turn everything into a
text embedded
		  graphic.

		  Please, has anyone gone head to head with the makers of
these products?
		  Don't they pay attention to W3c at all?  Maybe I am na´ve,
but I want them
		  to explain their thinking to me and how they will address
the very important
		  ADA issues.

		  Thanks for any and all responses as I get ready to write
to them directly.

		  Rachel

		  ~*~* ~*~
		  Rachel Harris, M.S., L.P.C., N.C.C.
		  Multnomah County Department of Community Justice
		  Web Site Coordinator
		  501 SE Hawthorne Blvd Suite 250.  Portland, OR 97214
		  Phone- (503) 988-6048  Fax-(503) 988-3990  TDD-(503)
248-3561
		  INTEROFFICE MAIL: B503/Suite 250
		  Rachel.D.Harris@co.multnomah.or.us
		  http://www.co.multnomah.or.us/dcj/
		  ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~



		  		-----Original Message-----
		  		From:	David Poehlman
[mailto:poehlman1@home.com]
		  		Sent:	Thursday, February 15, 2001 10:23 AM
		  		To:	ADAM GUASCH-MELENDEZ;
w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
		  		Subject:	Re: Animated GIFs and
accessibility
		  guidelines

		  		in answer to your question of whether or not
we can find the
		  skip
		  		link, yes.  I can click on it but for some
reason as with
		  many
		  		internal links, using jfw 3.7 and ie5.5sp1 I
become
		  disoriented as to
		  		where I am on the page when I follow them.

		  		----- Original Message -----
		  		From: "ADAM GUASCH-MELENDEZ"
<ADAM.GUASCH@EEOC.GOV>
		  		To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
		  		Sent: February 15, 2001 11:52 AM
		  		Subject: Re: Animated GIFs and accessibility
guidelines


		  		Animated GIFs shouldn't be a problem, since
they can be
		  stopped by any
		  		browser that can display them (at least
among the major
		  browsers - I'm
		  		not sure if this is true for WebTV or other
"internet
		  appliances").

		  		On the Bobby site, listing the sponsors
wouldn't be
		  appropriate for
		  		the ALT text, but would be appropriate for a
LONGDESC. The
		  designers
		  		may have decided that since the image is a
link to detailed
		  		information about their sponsors, that
wasn't necessary. I'd
		  say it's
		  		a judgement call, and an defensible choice.
However, running
		  Bobby
		  		against that page, in the Priority 1 User
Checks it says:

		  		   "Do you have a descriptive (D) link in
addition to
		  LONGDESC?"

		  		which - regardless of conformance with the
WAI guidelines -
		  suggests
		  		that the site doesn't actually implement
what the Bobby
		  designers
		  		consider to be "best practices." There are
several other
		  areas, such
		  		as in the extensive use of tables for
layout, where the site
		  appears
		  		to move away from theoretical ideals. On the
other hand, the
		  site
		  		seems to work, which to me is by far the
most important
		  concern. The
		  		WAI guidelines, are, after all, guidelines.
They're intended
		  to help
		  		people develop accessible sites, but if the
focus becomes
		  adherence to
		  		every checkpoint, instead of the overall
goal of
		  accessibility,
		  		they've failed in their purpose.

		  		Another question related to that site -
they've got a link
		  to skip the
		  		navigation stuff and go directly to the
content, which is
		  great. The
		  		link, however, is a transparent gif, with
the ALT text
		  providing the
		  		description of how it's to be used. Will
screen readers
		  currently in
		  		use pick this up properly?

		  		>>> Brian Kelly <b.kelly@ukoln.ac.uk>
02/15/01 04:08AM >>>
		  		Guideline 7 at
		  		http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/
		  		says
		  		"Ensure that moving, blinking, scrolling, or
auto-updating
		  objects or
		  		pages
		  		may be paused or stopped."
		  		and
		  		"Until user agents allow users to freeze
moving content,
		  avoid
		  		movement in
		  		pages."

		  		How does this apply to animated GIFs?

		  		Does it apply, for example, to the animated
sponsorship ads
		  at, for
		  		example,
		  		http://www.cast.org/bobby/

		  		I understood that movement on screens could
cause screen
		  readers to
		  		lose
		  		their focus.  Does this happen with animated
GIFs?  If so,
		  is this a
		  		concern?

		  		Also, while looking at the Bobby page, the
alt text for the
		  GIF simply
		  		says
		  		"Scrolling list of sponsors, without
mentioning their names
		  (IBM,
		  		Microsoft,
		  		etc.).  Again does this conform to the WAI
guidelines?

		  		Like Nick, I don't want to pick on the Bobby
site or the
		  CAST staff,
		  		but it
		  		is a Web site that those with interests in
accessibility
		  will look at.

		  		Thanks

		  		Brian (hoping this isn't an FAQ)


	
--------------------------------------------------------------
		  		Brian Kelly
		  		UKOLN
		  		University of Bath
		  		BATH
		  		BA2 7AY
		  		Email: B.Kelly@ukoln.ac.uk
		  		Phone: (+44) 1225 323943


		-- 
		Charles McCathieNevile    http://www.w3.org/People/Charles
phone: +61 409 134 136
		W3C Web Accessibility Initiative     http://www.w3.org/WAI
fax: +1 617 258 5999
		Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053,
Australia
		(or W3C INRIA, Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia
Antipolis Cedex, France)
Received on Tuesday, 20 February 2001 13:05:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:53 GMT