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

Re: PDF in WCAG 2

From: Harry Loots <harry.loots@ieee.org>
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 10:54:24 +0100
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Message-Id: <20040821095424.M98159@ieee.org>

> of course, we could just provide a link to it where it appears and a 
> link to jump back there from it.
> 
> Johnnie Apple Seed

or we could use a simple snippet of code to show/hide the 'footnote/endnote' -
and let's immediately decide to call it an "explanote" (from 'explanatory
note'), before the semantic police jump on us (mmmm... have we just coined a
new phrase for the Oxford Dictionary?)

advantage is that this information would be hidden (in CSS aware browsers),
until the user wishes to read the note; while the user of assistive
technology, does not have to go jump backwards/forwards in the page. I would
also provide a <skip> link so that users of assistive technology can skip the
explanation and get to the next logical paragraph. 

Regards
Harry
Ikhaya Internet Consulting
mobile : 0794 034 3919
~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~.~
Good judgement comes from experience.
Experience, of course, is the result 
of poor judgement.
               - Geoff Tabin

---------- Original Message -----------
From: "david poehlman" <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>
To: "Kassia Krozser" <ktwice@pandemic.com>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 14:24:26 -0400
Subject: Re: [Norton AntiSpam] Re: PDF in WCAG 2

> of course, we could just provide a link to it where it appears and a 
> link to jump back there from it.
> 
> Johnnie Apple Seed
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Kassia Krozser" <ktwice@pandemic.com>
> To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
> Cc: "WAI-IG" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
> Sent: Friday, August 20, 2004 2:19 PM
> Subject: Re: [Norton AntiSpam] Re: PDF in WCAG 2
> 
> Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
> >
> >> oh no, i don't think i can hack them. what i'm more concerned about is:
> >> does a footnote that, is changed to an endnote change in content and
> >> meaning?
> 
> > Still no answer on this then? Shame, it does pique my interest...
> 
> Setting aside the fact that many readers find endnotes irritating
> because they require constant back and forth (or, if one is reading
> online, scrolling up and down or switching between screens), 
> resulting in the loss of flow when reading, footnotes are generally 
> short and concise, in keeping with their position on a page. They 
> are best used for citing sources and short commentary necessary to 
> strengthen an argument being made in the text. Footnotes that take 
> up considerable page space are considered bad form.
> 
> Endnotes have the advantage of including more detailed information such
> as tables, graphs, and lengthy quotations. They also have a disadvantage
> in that readers require sufficient context in the note to understand
> what the reference means, so they may require attention when 
> written. If a writer uses endnotes instead of footnotes, he or she 
> should be aware that many people don't do the necessary back and 
> forth while reading, so the text also needs to be written so that 
> the argument is clearly understood without benefit of the note.
> 
> The choice of using endnotes versus footnotes is largely a matter of
> style, and certain disciplines seem to prefer one style over another.
> Some works include both, leveraging the strengths of each type of note.
> However, when making a choice, it's important to keep the reader in mind
> -- if a work consists largely of references that point reader back to
> source material without further detail, endnotes don't make sense. If
> the references contain detailed information or further elucidation, then
> footnotes don't make sense.
> 
> k2
------- End of Original Message -------
Received on Saturday, 21 August 2004 09:54:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 23:39:44 UTC