- From: Bruce Bailey <bbailey@clark.net>
- Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 23:41:27 -0500
- To: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
William was most kindly forwarding my comment, so I will reply. The words "significant barrier" comes straight from the P2 checkpoint on the WCAG. Non-scaleable text (in any form) obviously meets this criteria. I am not really going to try and argue that this is a P1 issue (although many experience blind surfers will tell you that even missing or bad ALT text is NOT always an absolute barrier to using a site). Are you seriously looking for an arguement as to why non-scaleable text should be promoted to P1 status? Maybe it should. It address the needs of a population that is often overlooked. Before we go down that path, I would first plead for a consensus to Len's orginal question, less this thread go on for another two months! Are small graphical text naviagion buttons a P2 issue? -- Bruce (hoping this post goes through) on 11/28/00 7:30 PM, Kynn Bartlett at kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com wrote: > At 11:22 AM -0800 11/28/00, William Loughborough wrote: >> William -- and anyone else who remains skeptical that non-scaleable text is >> a significant barrier: > > Do we believe that it is a priority one (as defined in WCAG 1.0) > barrier? If not, why not? > > --Kynn
Received on Tuesday, 28 November 2000 23:40:59 UTC