W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-comments-wcag20@w3.org > June 2004

A few comments

From: <hendrik.manhaeve@b-rail.be>
Date: 8 Jun 2004 13:58:00 +0200
To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Message-Id: <JA8AAAAAAajOjgABYQADD+0MwctU@DCS04.b-rail.be>

Hi,

I have read the draft an few thiings come to mind:

Guideline 1.1: I agree but I would make it a bit stronger and a the same time
give clear rules how to do it (this can rely on guideline 3.2):
ALT text must be used, but are the ALT texts helpful? Do they mean anything.
This makes a difference between the wording of the rule and the meaning of it.

A lot of websites provide ALT texts, but in my opinion these ALT texts are
wrong.

Provide an ALT texts with content when the non-text element serves a purpose,
if not make teh ALT text empty (as for 1 pixel graphics). A website read by
assistive technology should not repeatedly say the same thing (like
'decoration' because the page has 10 elements only there to please the eye). An
good description can be found at http://ppewww.ph.gla.ac.
uk/~flavell/alt/alt-text.html "The use of ALT texts in IMGS"

Guideline 1.4 contrast - Level 2 is intended to provide a quantitative
guideline. A lot of people with disabilities do not use any assistive
technologies (even not magnifiers) and therefor they are expecting a high
contrast. The ISO norm 9241 states a factor 3, other publications put 7-10
(publication towards usage of screens - like the  guideline form US
tarnsportation)

I did not find anything about the size of text (perhaps I've missed it)- text
should always be enlargeable (everyone can bebefit form this). So absolute
measurements for fonts should not be used.

My 2c,


Rik Manhaeve
Belgium
Received on Tuesday, 8 June 2004 10:45:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:11:04 UTC