- From: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
- Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 09:43:53 -0800
- To: "'WAI-GL'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
At 12:20 PM 11/28/00 -0500, Leonard R. Kasday wrote:
Is everyone behind me on this one? Please, preface any explanation with
"yes" or "no".
"no"
I'm tempted to say "I'm in front of you" in some jocular sense implying
that I'm for even more draconian enforcement of the guidelines, but...
I find it hard to believe that the stuff in question poses any significant
problem for low vision users so long as it has alt="text" of decent
quality. Maybe a little inconvenience (though I even doubt that), but not
that tough. Of course I can only magnify it 1000% and don't have low vision
so somebody who's affected by this could embarrass me by saying "you just
don't understand that getting to the alt is too much trouble" or whatever
that might make me feel uncaring.
To me at this time our rule is like the 55 mph speed limit and enforcement
gets tempered with reality.
I'd urge them to explore other options (CSS, whatever) but on the whole (as
W.C. Fields' epitaph is supposed to say, but doesn't) I'd rather be in
Philadelphia.
Go to a low vision clinic and see what they can tell you. If they think
this matters a lot (makes the site difficult to use), then switch me to
"yes" - with my limited experience I really have to hedge on this and opt
for "I dunno".
--
Love.
ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE
Received on Tuesday, 28 November 2000 12:47:31 UTC