Re: Keyboard Navigation For Document Exploration In SVG 1.2

Jason,

I agree with you that we don't know it is a square but this was a simple 
example.  I think to note that it is a square we'd need the intersection 
symbol to help us as we explore it.  I also agree with you on the cognative 
load but that's where simantics comes in to provide something more 
graspable.  YOur example as you rightly point out does little for me and I 
can fathom three dimentional tactile representations on a two d renderer.

Johnnie Apple Seed

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jason White" <jasonw@ariel.its.unimelb.edu.au>
To: "david poehlman" <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>
Cc: "Will Pearson" <will-pearson@tiscali.co.uk>; "Protocolls and formats" 
<w3c-wai-pf@w3.org>; <wai-xtech@w3.org>
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 6:29 PM
Subject: Re: Keyboard Navigation For Document Exploration In SVG 1.2



david poehlman writes:
 >
 > Will and all,
 >
 > Thanks for the explanation which fits with what I'd have expected in this
 > situation and which, I can imagine would provide a rich environment under
 > certain circulstances.
Agreed.
 >
 > I think at the least, you'd have to specify the square as either vertical 
or
 > horrizontal lines so as you explore the square, it would say vertical 
line
 > followed by its ifnormation such as length, position and color and
 > thickness.  then, when you come to the horrizontal line, it would be
 > expressed as a horrizontal line in the same fashion.
 >

But this still wouldn't be sufficient as it fails to specify whether
the lines are connected to form a polygon in the plane.

While there may be some for whom this would be valuable, I wouldn't
use it for cognitive reasons. As soon as the complexity went up beyond
simple polygons I would run into cognitive barriers very quickly.
Interpreting raised line graphics is hard enough; trying to remember
and process it in audio would be much worse. I've never been able to
interpret two-dimensional representations of three-dimensional
objects as depicted in raised-line diagrams. On the other hand, if the
figure is described in language that conveys its function or purpose I
can comprehend it.

It would be a mistake to consider any image exploration system as a
substitute for written descriptions, which cannot as yet be provided
automatically (though this may change). What I would need is a
description such as:
"Graph of f(x) = x^2 in a rectangular coordinate plane. The x and y
axes are labeled, as is the origin."
rather than statements about lines, curves etc., requiring navigation
by the user.

I am not suggesting my needs are the same as everyone else's, but
rather that an image exploration system would not provide me with
accessibility - and I am sure there are others in a similar position.

Received on Monday, 29 November 2004 23:38:02 UTC