- From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
- Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 11:03:29 -0400
- To: "w3c" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
At 02:19 PM 2000-04-05 +0100, Jonathan Chetwynd wrote: >Re: graphics and use of Icons: > >The issue of graphical rather than textual browsing has yet to be addressed, >and it is only once this issue of graphical pages is developed, that it can >be successfully achieved. AG:: I'm afraid you have a "chicken and egg" situation, here. Unless both the links lead you to appropriate next pages, and also the pages lead you to appropriate next links, we don't have a Web. And what we are about here is a Web, not a glossy magazine. That medium is widely available and it gives much care to graphic appeal. One thing to consider is that it might be true that the common concepts of site navigation (home, help, etc.) could be converged onto standard iconic vocabulary sooner than we can establish conventions for the visual representation of "what this page has to tell." On the other hand, people may be better at recognizing the Yahoo logo than the 'home' icon on the navbar. That suggests a research project which is a straightforward exercise in descriptive linguistics: examine trends in the recognition performance of the general populace [and selected CD population samples] as a function of how specific or general the concept alluded to in an icon is. The marketing industry may already have results in this area. Al
Received on Wednesday, 5 April 2000 11:02:58 UTC