Re: SVG techniques

In the normal case it seems unlikely that users will be presented with the
complete set of alternatives unless they ask for them.

To implement this, a simple technique is to have a set of user style sheets
that use selectors to decide how many levels of alternative content to
present, and to switch between them as desired.

It seems to me more of  aproblem in getting authors to produce alternative
content to this degree of detail, since it requires more work unless they are
using symbols and previously-authored descriptions.

thoughts?

Charles

On Thu, 12 Oct 2000, Marja-Riitta Koivunen wrote:

  At 01:35 PM 10/11/2000 -0400, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
  >Here is what we did at the face to face meeting on SVG techniques - they are
  >listed accoridng to WCAG 2.
  >
  >they are also available online at http://www.w3.org/2000/10/wcag2-svg-techs
  >
  >This fulfils one of my action items from the meeting...
  >
  >Charles McCN
  
  ...
  
  >
  >Guidelines and Checkpoints
  >
  >   Guideline 1. Design content that can be presented visually, auditorily or
  >   tactually, according to the needs and preferences of the user.
  >
  >    1.1 Ensure, by providing text equivalents to auditory and graphical
  >           presentations as necessary, that every component of a document,
  >           web page or multimedia presentation can be rendered as text in
  >           a standard character set.
  >           Note: a text equivalent can take a variety of forms. It is
  >           intended to fulfill the same function, and serve the same
  >           purpose as the auditory or visual presentation to which it
  >           provides an alternative. Thus, in writing a text equivalent, it
  >           may be appropriate, in some contexts, to provide a short label
  >           or descriptive phrase that can be substituted for the auditory
  >           or graphical material. In other circumstances, however, a
  >           longer explanation, description or exposition may be required.
  >           A text equivalentmay consist of structured content or metadata,
  >           if appropriate.
  >
  >           + Use a desc and title element for all g elements
  
  Do we really want to use these for all the g elements or just the groups 
  that have important (or some better wording) semantic meaning? It might 
  give users too much irrelevant low level information if the author has no 
  choice, but it is then more difficult to explain what the requirement is 
  and if it is fullfilled.
  
  Marja
  

-- 
Charles McCathieNevile    mailto:charles@w3.org    phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative                      http://www.w3.org/WAI
Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053, Australia
September - November 2000: 
W3C INRIA, 2004 Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France

Received on Thursday, 12 October 2000 10:05:20 UTC