the visibility of ALT text (was Re: raison d'etre)

aloha, again!

i know that i've already given y'all my ha'penny's worth, but now that i 
think of it, there isn't much difference between braille on the keypad 
connected to a touch screen kiosk without voice output and an alternate 
means of input (such as chording the keypad or using something more 
technologically sophisticated), and a user agent/browser/authoring tool's 
browser-emulation mode which exposes ALT text, but limits the real estate 
accorded for the rendering of the ALT text to the absolute measurements 
defined by the author _for the graphic_ -- ALT text is meaningless (at 
least in the GUI environment) if it can't be expanded (what's the old rule 
of thumb, if you can't see it, it ain't there?)

the user MUST have control over the way that ALT text is rendered (i.e. 
size, font, foreground and background colors, etc.) so that it is displayed 
in whatever manner best suits that individual user -- some, for example, 
may want the same rules they've defined/set for the display of elements to 
be inherited by any ALT text contained in that element,  while others may 
want to distinguish ALT text from other text in a way that is meaningful to 
them -- whether the rendering is being performed by an authoring tool or a 
user agent; otherwise, a lot of people are only seeing part of the picture, 
as it where, especially as i do not believe it to be a common behavior for 
user agents to expose ALT text in a ToolTip if image loading is turned off 
onMouseOver of the partially exposed ALT text ...

gregory

At 06:23 AM 9/27/00 -0700, you wrote:
>Every once in a while I feel the irresistible urge to rave a bit about why 
>we're here, sometimes with the still-rather-radical notion that we live in 
>a society where "disability" is regarded with both fear and loathing.
>
><rant>In a post to his Webwatch list Kelly Ford says: "Given the track 
>record of poor accessibility, don't you think it would have been prudent 
>to investigate accessibility as a main component of the Olympic web site 
>as I'm sure other criteria were investigated and demanded to be working? 
>Failure to do this and running from the issue at every opportunity 
>demonstrates malice to me."
>
>I hang with blind guys a lot and the experiences in everyday situations 
>make this proposition no longer "radical" but "real". In the case of 
>"developmentally disabled" folks it is even more unseemly, vicious and 
>altogether inhumane how they are regarded and treated. When Mary Frances 
>Platt at the May Media Meeting in Louisville last year pointed out that 
>the most important reasons for a Disability Rights Movement were based on 
>the undeniable fact that there is a powerful movement in our society to 
>incarcerate and even eliminate people with disabilities (sometimes in the 
>guise of "curing" disability entirely), she wasn't just whistlin' Dixie.
>
>The task of providing access to the Web as a read/write medium is very 
>important to the economy but more to our humanity. The "enlightened 
>self-interest" of inclusion is a basis for all our activities in the 
>Authoring Tools Working Group. </rant>
>
>--
>Love.
>                 ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE

--------------------------------------------------------------------
BORE, n.  A person who talks when you wish him to listen.
                          -- Ambrose Bierce, _The Devil's Dictionary_
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Gregory J. Rosmaita  <unagi69@concentric.net>
Camera Obscura       <http://www.hicom.net/~oedipus/index.html>
VICUG NYC            <http://www.hicom.net/~oedipus/vicug/>
Read 'Em & Speak     <http://www.hicom.net/~oedipus/books/>
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Received on Wednesday, 27 September 2000 13:58:10 UTC