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 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:00 GMT