W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > July 2002

Re: [svg-developers] Re: Announcing Geo-Colors a new SVG Geographic Information System Software

From: Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 11:57:58 -0000
Message-ID: <008101c23309$5aacee00$ca969dc3@emedia.co.uk>
To: <svg-developers@yahoogroups.com>
Cc: <www-svg@w3.org>

"Chris Lilley" <chris@w3.org>
> On Wednesday, July 24, 2002, 2:40:46 AM, Dave wrote:
>
> DP> At 04:59 23/07/2002, Ronan wrote:
> >>I'm not sure what your escape on this requirement is.
> >>If it's keyboard support, then that's one thing, but if the
requirement is
> >>for vision-impaired users, then you prob. need to redirect them away
from an
> >>SVG-rendered application and towards a text-only version.
>
> DP> Why Ronan? Shove the poor blind folk off in a corner?
>
> That was uncalled-for. Lets try and be constructive here. Serving
> alternate content, especially if the text version and the graphical
> version and the voice version are generated from the same source
> information and are equally timely and up to date, is certainly a
> viable way to go.

Only generally as a _last resort_  because of combinations of Access
Needs, such multiple versions nearly always exclude someone, for example
someone may have poor in general ability to get content from text however
they're also red/green colour blind, so your images are the best form
generally however for the small amount of content which relies on
red/green colour then a text equivalent is needed but only for that
element of the whole.

Also of course with multiple formats, how does a user find the
appropriate resource for them - how does a SVG viewing person tell their
friend who needs a text version what the url is...

> DP> Or even device independent events?
>
> If there is nothing proposed, let
> alone discussed, reviewed and implementable, then berating people for
> not having implemented it already is a trifle premature.

The SVG working group is closed, and has no public charter, it's very
difficult to be even motivated to make constructive comments about the
future of SVG as those outside the W3 don't know what SVG is intendedd to
be (is it a simple image format, is it an application format like flash
etc.)

Do I spend my time writing up a well thought out proposal to deal with
the lack of keyboard, forms etc. in SVG, when these are things which the
working group consider wholly outside their scope.

Also of course the public mailing lists of the w3 tend to not welcome
discussion of proposals (if a proposal/bug report/question is responded
to on the list at all it's via no more than an acknowledgement, but they
often go uncommented on entirely.)

If the working group needs more specific input from the wider community,
they need to open up the process somewhat, and if they do not already
have accessibiltiy experience within the group to deal with the
accessibility issues raised by implementation experience - then I'm very
concerned.

Jim.
Received on Wednesday, 24 July 2002 08:02:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:23 GMT