- From: Miguel Garcia <magarcia2@me.com>
- Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 13:50:25 -0500
- To: Responsive Images Group <public-respimg@w3.org>
> > Whether there is a clear real life example, adding accessibility requirements should not be overlooked or discarded. In the case of high contrast images especially, people designing accessible websites should have the ability to define fallbacks for individuals who would benefits in those very specific use cases. Having family members with seriously impaired vision where monochromatic browsing is necessary, I know they struggle with things like news websites that rely heavily on visual stimuli to educate their users. While many use Screen Readers and the like, it is hard to guarantee designers are supporting all the proper accessibility tools they should. > > Sent from my iPad > > On Oct 25, 2012, at 1:21 PM, Marcos Caceres <marcosscaceres@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> We are still lacking any evidence that show images have been adapted for the following three scenarios/use cases: >> >> * Print >> * monochrome >> * high-contrast >> >> >> As per our document: >> http://responsiveimagescg.github.com/ri-usecases/#print,-monochrome,-and-high-contrast >> >> Without having any actual proof that there are at least a few sites in the wild that have been designed with, for instance, the Kindle specifically in mind - it's difficult to justify use case 4.4. >> >> -- >> Marcos Caceres >> http://datadriven.com.au >> >> >>
Received on Thursday, 25 October 2012 18:51:01 UTC