- From: John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com>
- Date: Mon, 6 May 2019 08:55:58 -0500
- To: "lisa.seeman" <lisa.seeman@zoho.com>
- Cc: public-personalization-tf <public-personalization-tf@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAKdCpxy9LAfKrYbvhVkEd3HR0xDGaO1KRbb4SPzgoXgJn0jm6A@mail.gmail.com>
Hello Lisa, All, Lisa, I remain both confused and concerned here. As I read your proposal, you are effectively saying you expect content authors to do this: <img symbol="Content" href="mysymb.bmp"> <img symbol="Authors" href="mysymb.bmp"> <img symbol="will" href="mysymb.bmp"> <img symbol="be" href="mysymb.bmp"> <img symbol="writing" href="mysymb.bmp"> <img symbol="with " href="mysymb.bmp"> <img symbol="symbols" href="mysymb.bmp"> Respectfully (and putting aside the fact that browsers do not render .bmp files), no mainstream content site is going to do this - we learned that lesson years ago with "text-only" pages for screen readers. Your proposal appears to call for a secondary (alternative) content page, which simply will not surface on the web, certainly not at scale. This brings into question an evaluation of our goals here: is the goal to provide a mechanism for specialty pages specially authored for a limited sub-set of the web community, or is the goal to create a mechanism that allows for 'transformation' of text to symbols? The demonstration we saw 2 weeks ago from Mats showed us a 'tool' - a plugin - for Libre Office that did the 'transformation' on the fly, and programmatically at that. What he did not show us was a mechanism where each symbol was laboriously applied to the document in a hand-authored fashion. I suspect what we need to do is instead find a means whereby we inform a 'tool' *which* symbol set to reference: either one linked-to online to an open source collection like Bliss, or alternatively to a localized symbol set the individual user has downloaded to their machine (or. al;ternatively, one that is embedded into the tool itself). In either case however, the "writing" of the transformed text into graphic files will be handled by the helper-app / tool: there is no need for any human author intervention when the transformation happens. The tool outputs <ing src="symbol_X.png"> <ing src="symbol_Y.png"> <ing src="symbol_Z.png"> based upon a programmatic mapping table associated to the helper app (and / or the symbol set) and effectively "overlays" that content on the screen. This maps to what I saw 2 weeks ago (April 22nd) and has always been what I sort of expected our outcome would be. JF On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 9:49 AM lisa.seeman <lisa.seeman@zoho.com> wrote: > Hi Folks > > To help us gather our thoughts I started a wiki page to add implementation > options for symbols > I am sure it is incomplete so please add options, advantages, > disadvantages or identify anything you think should be changed! > It is just to get the ball rolling. > > See: > https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/wiki/Options-for-symbol > > > All the best > > Lisa Seeman > > LinkedIn <http://il.linkedin.com/in/lisaseeman/>, Twitter > <https://twitter.com/SeemanLisa> > > > > -- *​John Foliot* | Principal Accessibility Strategist | W3C AC Representative Deque Systems - Accessibility for Good deque.com
Received on Monday, 6 May 2019 13:56:57 UTC