Re: www accessibility for non-readers

jonathan chetwynd wrote:

> Having studied the relevant parts of  these are my thoughts
> 0.0 
>     Where possible sites should be transparent in meaning without the use of 
>      text.
>     ~1-5% of the adult population are non-readers.

We hope that checkpoint 16.2 addresses this:

    Use icons or graphics (with a text equivalent) 
    where they facilitate comprehension of the page.
> 1.0  Provide text equivalents for text.
>     ensure that the minimum text is used that conveys the meaning, with links to details.
>     ~50% have a vocabulary of 2k words.

This sounds like a possible technique for checkpoint 16.1.
> 1.01
>     Provide data in site titles (meta tabs) as to number of words used and readability (flesch reading ease).

Again, this sounds like a technique related to checkpoint 16.1
> 1.1   
>     Provide a means in the common browsers for:
>     turning off text labels (ALT) for non-readers.
>     excluding complex or lengthy sites (1.01), conversely trite or youthful ones

This facility is more suited to the User Agent Accessibility Guidelines
(see The guidelines being developed
in that Working Group address issues such as control of alternative

> z.z
>     Provide tabs for text in HTML

I'm sorry but I don't understand this comment.

Thank you for taking the time to review the document,

 - Ian

Ian Jacobs (

Received on Thursday, 11 March 1999 12:46:30 UTC