W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > December 2005

Re: SVGT 1.2 Comments and the need for accessibility techniques

From: Jonathan Chetwynd <j.chetwynd@btinternet.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2005 07:24:57 +0000
Message-Id: <5F9396FF-44BF-4C29-B230-BA1551EF3605@btinternet.com>
Cc: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>, "Scott Hayman" <shayman@rim.com>, "Will Pearson" <will-pearson@tiscali.co.uk>, <www-svg@w3.org>, <wai-xtech@w3.org>
To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>

Chris,

Why do you continue to insist that I haven't read the appendix*?
It is clear that whilst the 'F' appendix may point to other normative  
documents, they aren't in the SVG domain.

for instance as I asked previously in this thread, how is it intended  
that SVG will meet WCAG 2.4.8 :

  Information about the user's location within a set of delivery  
units is available.
http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/guidelines.html#navigation-mechanisms:

" Providing a breadcrumb trail.
   Providing a site map.
   Identifying content's relationship to a larger collection using a
technology-specific technique.
   Using an icon or text to indicate current location within
navigation bars. "


SVG requires it's own accessibility techniques and guidelines.

regards

Jonathan Chetwynd
Accessible Solutions
http://www.eas-i.co.uk

*My query regarding the accessibility appendix was why it had been  
dropped from recent 'full' specifications.
the 'F' appendix comes after 4 years and frankly isn't representative  
of the hard work that the SVG WG has achieved in other areas.



On 7 Dec 2005, at 09:11, Chris Lilley wrote:

On Wednesday, December 7, 2005, 8:17:01 AM, Jonathan wrote:

JC> Chris,

JC> Accessibility deserves more than your filibustering.

Jonathan, this is getting tiresome. I was going to reply privately to
save you embarrassment, but since you chose to cross-post widely I
feel it necessary to respond in public.

Accessibility is important. I have already told you that there is an
accessibility appendix,

   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2005Nov/0179.html

although you can't seem to find it

    http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2005Nov/0191.html
    http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2005Nov/0193.html

or even read the right spec.

   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2005Nov/0188.html

In other emails, or even in other parts of emails where you complain
that there is no appendix, you do find it,

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2005Nov/0193.html

but then seem unable to follow a link to a normative section and post
complaining that the appendix is informative.

Other days, like today and yesterday, you merely throw insults or state
that you have never had a response - which is not going to work in an
archived forum.


JC> On 6 Dec 2005, at 17:19, Chris Lilley wrote:


JC> On Tuesday, December 6, 2005, 8:02:43 AM, Jonathan wrote:

JC>> I also wrote recently to Chris and yourself regarding this issue,
JC>> but failed to receive any response. Also mentioning other relevant
JC>> accessibility failings in SVG.

JC> Actually you did get several responses, for example I pointed out  
that
JC> you were looking in the wrong document.


-- 
  Chris Lilley                    mailto:chris@w3.org
  Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
  W3C Graphics Activity Lead
  Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG
Received on Thursday, 8 December 2005 07:29:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:32 GMT