- From: Lisa Seeman <seeman@netvision.net.il>
- Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 08:12:08 +0200
- To: "WAI \(E-mail\)" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
OK, I would like to propose a compromise position. Lets change Greg's draft to : "You may use text in images, when the text has a primarily graphical function, if ..." instead of : "You may use text in images when the text does not convey its literal meaning, but has a more graphical function, if". This will address the concern that a designer making a show case site will be restricted. Further if a designer places redundant textual links, then the main function of the graphical link becomes its look. I.E. the primary function is now graphical. However I _can_ not_ make a bitmap of all my BILI text and use that in place text - which was my main concern. Are there any problems with this? The revised proposal is now: 3.1 When an appropriate markup language exists AND WILL WORK, use markup rather than images to convey information TO ALLOW TEXT SCALABILITY. [Priority 2] For example, use SVG for line art, MathML to mark up mathematical equations, and CSS for text-oriented special effects. You may use text in images, when the text has a primarily graphical function, if the effect cannot be achieved with markup, (as in the case of some for logos and limited accent elements) provided that you provide a textual equivalent to the content contained in the image.
Received on Sunday, 29 October 2000 01:22:21 UTC