W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2002

Re: Blind Users and Web Comics (Dr. Fun?)

From: Phillip Pi <philpi@apu.edu>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2002 15:56:04 -0800 (PST)
To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0201091554080.24588-100000@home.apu.edu>
I think Dr. Fun tries to make his cartoon accessible to the 
readers/viewers, but most of his cartoons are based on drawings and not 
all cartoon captions are in text (out of the images). His cartoons are 
similar to The Far Side (Larson).

"May 10,000 ants never invade your underwear drawer." --unknown
  /\___/\                                             Phillip Pi (Ant)
 / /\ /\ \              E-Mail: philpi@earthlink.net or philpi@apu.edu
| |.   .| |
   \ _ /                     The Ant Farm: http://antfarm.home.dhs.org
    ( )       ICQ UIN: 2223658. Resume: http://ptp-resume.home.dhs.org

On Wed, 9 Jan 2002, Patrick Burke wrote:

> At 02:52 PM 1/9/02, Kynn Bartlett wrote:
> >So, therefore, I'm curious in hearing what blind users think about
> >the idea of using web accessibility techniques to make web comic
> >strips and comic books more accessible to users with disabilities.
> >Would you "rather just read a book"?
> As a blind person I would say it is definitely worth doing, & I will 
> happily throw a brick at anyone who says it isn't!
> I have always enjoyed the descriptions of comics that my friends have done 
> for me, & it would be great to have some form of this on the Web (done 
> preferably by the author). I remember being particularly frustrated by a 
> Krazy Kat page a couple years ago that had great biographical info on 
> George Herriman & discussed the social commentary in his strips, but didn't 
> contain any description of the scanned comics themselves. (I guess it would 
> be hard to get the author's longdescs in this case, but somebody could 
> still do it.)
> I would say there is a sliding scale from graphic-novel-type art comics 
> (that would indeed be difficult to describe adequately) to things like 
> political cartoons (where the point isn't so much the image itself as the 
> political point that it makes, which can be stated pretty well with 
> words).  Clearly the pure text version does not replace the original work, 
> just as a book of art criticism does not rplace the works it discusses. But 
> this still doesn't prevent people from describing paintings in works of art 
> criticism. So also it shouldn't stop the creation of this text parallel for 
> comics.
Received on Wednesday, 9 January 2002 18:56:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:16 UTC