- From: Bailey, Bruce <Bruce_Bailey@ed.gov>
- Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 09:26:51 -0400
- To: "'dd@w3.org'" <dd@w3.org>, "'Wendy A Chisholm'" <wendy@w3.org>
- Cc: "'w3c-wai-gl@w3.org'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
I like Daniel's version best so far. I would suggest adding <Q>(including most logos)</Q> after <Q>for vector graphics</Q>. Aside from logos (in headers. on sponsor buttons, or in banners) and graphical text used in navigation elements, the other place textual images are common (often illegitimately, IMHO) is in image maps. If we are issuing a clarification, we should include this practice as well. I still think CSS makes the test for <Q>an appropriate markup language exists and is adequately supported</Q>: (1) We are talking about sites that wish to be AA compliant and not merely A. Therefore they care -- and they should understand that CSS works much better for folks with low vision -- and that this need outweighs the concerns for the marginal behavior of deprecated browsers. We should make it clear to this audience what constitutes the preferred practice. (2) CSS was explicitly designed to handle the formatting need of "buttons". At least one major market product does an adequate job with it. (3) We have good examples of CSS implementations for buttons and tabs which are backward compatible. These URLs have come up on this thread already, but I can't help mentioning them again: http://www.hwg.org/ http://astro.temple.edu/~kasday/wai/tabs/ (4) Logos are "art" and therefore should be granted more "artistic license" than objectives like "matching the look of a paper brochure". Navigation elements are much more important to the usability of site, and closer related to content, than logos. They should therefore be held to a higher standard of accessibility. Both of these are legitimate reasons why logos and navigation buttons should be treated differently. > -----Original Message----- > From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On > Behalf Of Daniel Dardailler > > I agree with everything you said except for the concluding rewrite of > the checkpoint. > > Instead of > [snip] > > I suggest something like > > 3.1 When an appropriate markup language exists and is adequately > supported in tools, use markup rather than pixel-based > images to convey > information. [Priority 2] Examples of markup languages that can > replace use of images include: MathML to mark up mathematical > equations, SVG for vector graphics and HTML plus style sheets to > format text and control layout. > > Note the change in wording in the second part of the checkpoint, as I > don't want to make the reader believe that MathML or SVG are > deemed to > be adequately supported. > > Or maybe this should be changed into a "until user agent" kind of > stuff, except it would be a "if user agent".
Received on Tuesday, 17 October 2000 09:27:45 UTC