W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2005

Re: Accessibility of "CHM" format resources

From: Tina Holmboe <tina@greytower.net>
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 01:31:48 +0200 (CEST)
Message-Id: <200506062331.j56NVmFU004083@asterix.andreasen.se>
To: orion.adrian@gmail.com
Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org

On  6 Jun, Orion Adrian wrote:

> I would ask that you don't nitpick. Programming is a reasonable word
> here since I'm providing instructions that are compiled or
> interpretted for a platform. The usage of elements here is the common
> English usage.

  You might be thinking of "nit-pick", which has nothing to do with what
  I did:

    "Nit-picking: n. informal. Petty criticism."


  We - aka the accessibility community - have a problem which, most of
  the time, go uncommented 'pon.

  When I started working in the field, some twelve years ago, those who
  claimed expertise existed mostly in the
  comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html Usenet group. Sprout
  semi-coherent knowledge there, and you'd get your head chopped off -
  peer review at its finest, and its ugliest.

  Today, a claim to expertise is met by "Ooh!" and "Aah!" - and if there
  is a published book involved then status as a deity is quick to
  follow. So, people are talking about certification. Separate the wheat
  from the chaff, so to speak.

  You, Sir, claims certification as a CSS2 "Master", and yet you are
  propagating the use of incorrect nomenclature for your very field.

    - CSS is not programming by any conceivable stretch of the
      imagination. The instructions are not "compiled" nor "interpreted"
      in the sense these terms are used in *programming*.

    - The word "element", as used in common English, has absolutely
      nothing what so ever to do with the way it is used in CSS and
      HTML. CSS is quite explicit in its use: "The primary syntactic
      constructs of the document language." - you may wish to change the
      names of elements in (X)HTML, but when you talk about "elements in
      CSS" and how they are "poorly named", you are doing everyone a
      disservice. Calling a spade a hammer doesn't do anyone any good.


  Agreeing upon which words describe which abstract ideas is the very
  foundation for human communication - and, in a way, the very first
  step in accessibility.

  To quote the Perl manual: "But then you know when you use
  RedefineTheWorld() that you're redefining the world and willing to take
  the consequences."

  You redefined parts of very important language; Mr. Adrian. The
  consequences just came home to roost.

  This is not petty criticism. THIS is pointing out that you are calling
  "a spade" "an elephant", and would you *please* stop confusing people
  by doing so?





> In terms of text wrapping I'm talking about what Microsoft Word allows
> you to do and what float allows you to do in limited cases. I'd like
> the ability to wrap text on both sides of an object placed anywhere.

  I am looking forward to hearing what the CSS WG said when you made
  this suggestion to them.

-- 
 -    Tina Holmboe                    Greytower Technologies
   tina@greytower.net                http://www.greytower.net/
   [+46] 0708 557 905
Received on Monday, 6 June 2005 23:31:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:21 GMT