W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > October to December 2000

RE: Raw notes from Martin Duerst / Ian Jacobs UAAG/I18N discussion

From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 13:35:30 -0500
Message-Id: <200011121810.NAA383048@smtp1.mail.iamworld.net>
To: Francois Yergeau <yergeau@alis.com>, "Ian Jacobs" <ij@w3.org>, <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>, <w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org>, <nakane@w3.org>
At 11:10 AM 2000-11-12 -0500, =?us-ascii?Q?Francois_Yergeau?= wrote:
>Ian Jacobs wrote:
>> =============================================
>> Charset information
>> =============================================
>> IJ: If it affects everyone equally, then we have a convention
>>     not to include such requirements in such a document.
>

Yes, but the WCAG has placed text in a unique role as the equivalent that you
must have.  Any technical defect which enables or defeats the function of text
as communication, as charset defects do, has a disproportionate impact on
those
dependent on the text for their access to the information.  For all the
reasons
that the WCAG singled text out in this way, this is an unequal hit to people
with disabilities, not an equal hit.

Speech users and all users with smaller-than-normal viewports are unequally
dis-abled by charset defects.  The rest of the users can work around the
effects of charset-related defects more easily, relying on the screen gestalt,
as Francois has described.

Charset information does not fit the pre-condition of this rule (affects
everyone equally).

Al

>I'm not sure what's the exact context of that discussion, but if it is on
>the importance of having (correct) charset info, I think it is an
>accessibility issue, esp. for people with cognitive diabilities.  Having to
>understand that a page displayed as garbage can be fixed by pulling an
>Encoding menu and trying out each entry therein (and choosing the most
>probable ones) may be beyond the capabibilities of many.  Same, to a lesser
>degree perhaps, for people whole have (physical) trouble manipulating menus.
>And if a screen reader spits out garbage, how do you know to fix the
>encoding if you can't see the garbage displayed on the screen?
>
>
>
>> MD: If you know what "fr" means but don't have resources
>> to handle it (e.g., a dictionary), that's one thing (e.g.,
>> you can ask the user if using the italian dictionary you
>> do have is ok).
>
>Or better, offer to download appropriate resources (such as recent browsers
>do for fonts when encountering a new language).
>
>
>> IJ: We've avoided the term "script" in this context to
>> avoid confusion with "scripting languages".
>
>"Writing system" could do instead.  Not an exact synonym, but probably close
>enough for the purpose.
>
>
>--
>Francois Yergeau
>  
Received on Sunday, 12 November 2000 13:05:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 06:50:22 GMT