W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2004

Re: link to us: Is there a recommendation to provide a graphic for external linking? if so where?

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@sidar.org>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 19:19:11 +0100
Message-Id: <FB079DFE-4AAB-11D8-9125-000A958826AA@sidar.org>
Cc: WAI Interest Group <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>, tina@greytower.net
To: Jonathan Chetwynd <j.chetwynd@btinternet.com>

Don't ask me what WAI may advocate - I can tell you what they do 
advocate because they are advocating it so it isn't really news, and I 
can tell you what I, as a single participant, think they should 
advocate. I can even often tell you what Sidar advocates WAI do - we 
have a group that discusses points we think are interesting in Spanish, 
for people who cannot otherwise follow the development of WAI specs and 
provide their input.

It seems to me clear that there is a case for providing a visual 
identifier for your site as well as a clear text name. This might be 
used as a "favicon" (horrible word), used to provide clear and 
consistent style, and so forth.

Making this available for others to link to your site would be a 
helpful thing to do. In my opinion WAI is perfectly able to say "this 
is a key requirement". Other opinions are likely to include that this 
is attempting to restrict people's legal right to dispose of their 
property (in this case such an image) as they see fit. There are also 
likely to be others besides easyJet who will only permit use of the 
icon under certain conditions (for that matter, have a look at the 
conditions under which people are entitled to use the WAI conformance 
icons, bobby icons, W3C validator icons, etc...).

So I can't predict what WAI will end up saying in this case. But I can 
predict that if some summary of this discussion isn't presented as a 
proposal to the relevant working group - in this case the WCAG group I 
think - there is not likely to be any impact on what WAI advocates.

just my 2 cents worth



On 19 Jan 2004, at 19:14, Jonathan Chetwynd wrote:

> Chaals,
> perhaps I should make it clear at this stage (again) that peepo.co.uk 
> is dedicated to the public domain
> http://commoncontent.org/catalog/web/educational/594/
> this means that all the graphics are freely useable by anyone for any 
> purpose.
> peepo.com is used as a bridge to the broader world, and this is far 
> from ideal ~:"
> Is it possible that WAI might advocate:
> public domain link graphics for AAA
> Royalty free link graphics for AA
> Restrictive trademark for A
> well perhaps that's a little too much detail, but you seem to suggest 
> that
> royalty free may not be good enough, and that trademarks really don't 
> get us far down the accessibility route.
Charles McCathieNevile                          Fundación Sidar
charles@sidar.org                                http://www.sidar.org
Received on Monday, 19 January 2004 13:20:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:27 UTC