W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 2017

Re: Unicode character for CC symbol?

From: Michael A. Peters <mpeters@domblogger.net>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2017 16:34:05 -0700
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Message-ID: <ac02ace2-5760-fe3a-0d45-3ff88aeb3b52@domblogger.net>
On 09/07/2017 01:53 AM, Nigel Megitt wrote:
>> Those client side options aren't really available when the CC button is
> an image, the server must support other locales or the user is stuck
> with the default.
>
> Of course they are available. Generally user interface localisation is
> achieved by dereferencing values from a pre-defined list (e.g. a numerical
> value understood to mean the "File" menu) into the specific string or
> resource to be presented, using some kind of lookup against a table that
> varies based on localisation. Hence menu items will get a different string
> of unicode points for that menu for English ("File") compared to, say,
> French ("Fichier"). It is not usually done at the level of mapping
> individual code points into glyphs.
>
> I don't know how many systems localise user interface icons like this - I
> imagine that icons are generally designed to be universal. But I would put
> the selection of alternate versions in this layer rather than having a
> single Unicode point for which glyph selection would require localisation
> awareness.
>
>

http://tease.social/emojitest.xhtml#subgrp-audio/video_symbols

That's interface elements that have unicode codepoints.

To create an interface, images are not needed *except* to provide the CC 
button.

With the CC button as a glyph, not only is an image not needed for it - 
but the font can design it to match the other glyphs in the font.

If the CC glyph designed in the 80s really isn't universal, then yet, 
add CC glyphs for the other regions.

I asked before but didn't see the response. What do the native browser 
HTML5 video players use for the CC glyph outside the united states?

If CC really isn't universally understood at this point, changing the 
unicode glyph is easier than changing an image in order to localize a 
web or desktop application because glyphs can be used the webmaster or 
software designer has no knowledge of.

And they would match the other interface elements as long as the font 
designer had knowledge of them, but even if the font developer didn't 
have knowledge of them, an appropriate glyph from a font that did have 
knowledge could be used.

You can't really do that with images, the application designer has to 
have knowledge of every possible region specifoc version of the CC symbol.
Received on Thursday, 7 September 2017 23:34:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 7 September 2017 23:34:38 UTC