W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > July 2008

[Accessibility] O vs. O' and Diagrams

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 13:03:09 +0100
Message-Id: <08BB27DA-3B5B-4973-B52C-C7831B5192A8@cs.man.ac.uk>
To: OWL Working Group WG <public-owl-wg@w3.org>

As part of working on ACTION-168, I am trying to read our documents  
using the VoiceOver screen reader (which is built into macos). (This  
is by no means the most common screen reader, fwiw.)

One thing I notices is that VoiceOver, at least, with my current  
configuration, reads O and O' identically which, you can imagine, is  
horribly confusing ;) We might consider using an O, O1 or similar  
convention rather than O, OPrime. (Even when I up the verbosity, I  
get "O apostrophe" rather than "O Prime". (The &prime; entity, alas,  
doesn't seem to be handled better, but it could be better.)

Our diagrams don't have useful alt. Given that they are part of the  
specification itself with no proper alternative form (at the moment),  
I'm not sure what to do. There's
	http://grabbag.alacorncomputer.com/accessibleuml.html
With the hilarious, if brutally honest, line:

"""TeDUB was a European Union-funded project running from 2001 to  
2005. It was intended to deliver a way for blind people to access  
arbitrary technical diagrams - engineering, architectural and so on.  
It failed to deliver anything on this front."""

They do have some advice on how to deal with XMI (the XML format for  
UML). I think having that as a longdesc at least would be much more  
useful. Of course, since we can already show/hide bits, giving an  
alternative rendering is a bit easier for us.

Cheers,
Bijan.
Received on Monday, 21 July 2008 12:00:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:05 UTC