RE: Please review for this week's call: proposal and process for the "text in images" thread

I can only hope that repeating my opinion using completely different words
still counts as "new information"!

I am not in favor of amending Checkpoint 3.1 unless we are making
substantive changes.  The proposed rewording is marginally better than
what's there, but not dramatically so.  If we agree with Len's solution for
the text in image problem, let us say that!  If the Checkpoint is to be
revised or clarified, the explicit practice that is causing the barrier to
accessibility should be referenced!

I am confused by the proposed disclaimer <Q>Until style and graphic markup
languages are more common, minimize the use of text in images.</Q>.  So,
once Navigator has better support for CSS, page authors can put all the text
in images they want?!?  If "style and graphic markup languages" is replaced
with "SVG" then the caution makes sense.  If "style" is really suppose to
refer to CSS -- then we have no business recommending CSS in the next
sentence!

I also do not understand the need for the reference to Arial and Times.  (I
understand that these fonts work well for CSS.  I understand that this
tidbit of information is helpful.  I don't think the choice of font face is
a P2 issue.  I don't think this snippet of information belongs to Checkpoint
3.1.)

I propose leaving Checkpoint 3.1 alone.  (Or even deleting it as Ian
suggests!)  Either way, I also advocate reaching a consensus that it does
mean what it says!  If we decide to change it, the rewording should make the
WAI position on graphical text (as opposed to textual graphics?) perfectly
clear.  IMHO, Cynthia's rewrite does NOT do this forcefully enough.  I
suggest the following:

<blockquote>
3.1 When an appropriate markup language exists, use markup rather than
images to convey information. [Priority 2]  For example, use SVG for line
art, MathML to mark up mathematical equations, and CSS for text-oriented
special effects.  Avoid using images to represent text (including in
repeated navigation elements) -- use text and style sheets instead.  You may
use text in images for logos and limited accent elements where specialized
fonts and text treatments are required and cannot be achieved with CSS.
Refer also to guideline 6 and guideline 11.
</blockquote>

I agree with William that tweaking the WCAG 1.0 is not all that important.
It is, however, important to identify common practices that are P2
accessibility barriers.  Next we go on to making sure WCAG 2.0 addresses
this point adequately.  Whatever happens, we still should try for consensus
on this issue.  Amending Checkpoint 3.1 might well be the most effective
path to the larger goal!

Are we agreed that graphical text (outside of logos and the like) is
significant obstacle for people with low vision?

Cheers,
Bruce

> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of Wendy A Chisholm
> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2000 3:18 PM
> To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
> Subject: Please review for this week's call: proposal and process for
> the "text in images" thread
> 
> 
> Please:
> review this entire message.
> 
> Please:
> Do not respond to this message unless you have new 
> information that has not 
> been presented yet.  There has been quite a lot of traffic on 
> this thread 
> and I have been very pleased to see people sending 
> considerate, thoughtful 
> messages.  I am glad to see how much information has been 
> collected in the 
> last couple of weeks.  However, Jason and I believe we are 
> ready to wrap up 
> this discussion.
> 
> Therefore, I propose:
> 
> <blockquote> 3.1 Use markup rather than images to convey information. 
> [Priority 2]  This checkpoint is strongly tied to checkpoint 11.1.
> Note: Until style and graphic markup languages are more 
> common, minimize 
> the use of text in images.  For example, use HTML text styled 
> with CSS. 
> Choose common fonts (such as Arial and Times) that can be 
> rendered using 
> CSS. You may use text in images for logos and limited accent 
> elements where 
> specialized fonts and text treatments are required and cannot 
> be achieved 
> with CSS.
> </blockquote>
> 
> Thank you Cynthia for the bulk of the wording for this proposal.
> 
> Process for Thursday's telecon:
> Jason and I  have decided to give each person one minute to 
> speak on this 
> proposal.  We will then take the information gathered and 
> figure out where 
> to go from there.  If possible, we would like to close this at the 
> call.  However, this is not a formal vote on this proposal, 
> but a chance to 
> hear each person speak for one minute (and I will be 
> timing!!).  If you are 
> unable to make the call, please send a 2 sentence statement 
> to me by 2:00 
> Eastern U.S. time (i.e. I must receive it no later than 2 
> hours before the 
> working group call) and I will make sure it is represented 
> during the call.
> 
> Thank you,
> --wendy

Received on Wednesday, 25 October 2000 16:32:12 UTC