- From: Chris Ridpath <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca>
- Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 15:52:00 -0400
- To: "Evaluation & Repair Interest Group" <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>, "Wendy A Chisholm" <wendy@w3.org>
I've updated the ERT doc with the latest recommendations on BLINK. The URL is: http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/ert/#Technique7.2.A Marquee is much the same and is at: http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/ert/#Technique7.3.A Please let me know if it misses some of your concerns. I hope that the document is general enough so it does not limit the implementation. Chris ----- Original Message ----- From: Wendy A Chisholm <wendy@w3.org> To: Evaluation & Repair Interest Group <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org> Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 1999 2:22 PM Subject: Re: BLINK repair mechanisms (calling all CSS gurus!) > I agree with Len's concerns, particularly that we want a general > statement. I think his proposal works well. > > --w > > > >2. I don't think we should be so specific about the user interface. I > >would want a general statement like > > > >"The tool shall by default replace BLINK with STRONG, but give the author > >the option to override this choice with EM, or any CSS defined style. The > >tool shall offer the user an explanation of why CSS BLINK is undesirable." > > > >The difference between this wording and the wording in the minutes > >(reproduced below) is that the wording in the minutes prescribes a specific > >"wizzard" style interface, with prescribed steps in a prescribed order. > >Read strictly, it would e.g. prevent a tool developer from offering a > >dialog box which presents all options simultaneously, with the warning > >explanation next to the choice of CSS blink. > > > >We should specify function, not user interface here. If people feel > >strongly that we've got to be specific, we should at least have a general > >disclaimer that any other user interface with equivalent functionality is > >permitted; and this disclaimer should be strongly emphasized (e.g. by using > >BLINK <smile> ). > > > >Len > > > > > >Here's the wording in the minutes I'm referring to: > > > > >Resolved: Repair strategy will consist of the following steps: > > >1) remove BLINK or replace with STRONG or EM > > >2) if author chooses "No" when prompted to replace BLINK, issue a dialog > > >containing an explanation of accessibility and usability problems posed by > > >BLINK > > >3) if author chooses "Use BLINK Anyway", prompt the user (or > >automatically) use > > >CSS to achieve blinking effect so that end user has control over > > presentation > > > >------- > >Leonard R. Kasday, Ph.D. > >Institute on Disabilities/UAP, and > >Department of Electrical Engineering > >Temple University > > > >Ritter Hall Annex, Room 423, Philadelphia, PA 19122 > >kasday@acm.org > >(215) 204-2247 (voice) > >(800) 750-7428 (TTY)
Received on Wednesday, 20 October 1999 15:52:10 UTC