- From: Anne Pemberton <apembert@crosslink.net>
- Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 18:38:24 -0800
- To: Wendy A Chisholm <wendy@w3.org>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Wendy, Use of "Next" on the right arrow isn't a "graphical" function, it's a navigational function. The arrow is the "illustration" for the function ... I've been noting how my students use the Internet, and the arrow to indicate "next" just isn't intuitive! The ones who can read sometimes try to read stories online, will read down to the bottom of a page, then ASK what to do when the arrows are in clear view. If the uses of young children is indicative of disabled users with cognitive problems, the arrows without words just don't work. The use of the arrows without a word has to be TAUGHT and LEARNED ... I realize that the guidelines could be more neatly organized if text were always separable from graphics, but if the goal is accessibility, the text needs to be there, plus available as alt text, title, or whatever else can be used. The purpose of the navigations controls it to get the user where he/she wants to go ... The user of magnification has the arrow whether it has text on it or not ... if a magnification user also needs the text, there may be a problem, but the solution isn't eliminating text for all users ... would it help if the text were a caption directly beneath the arrow and white spaced from anything below? Come to think of it, if navigation graphics always carried text, there would be a use for standard SVG graphics to be created and circulated for use. It could help promote the use of SVG for such applications while .jpg's and .gif's continue use as illustrations ... but I really would like to see a technique tied to a guideline that suggested two sizes of content illustrations to improve magnification ... Lots of (LD)hubby's train sites provide "click on small picture to see big picture" ... But, if it can't be part of WCAG 1.0, it needs to be in 2.0 ... Anne At 03:48 PM 12/14/00 -0500, Wendy A Chisholm wrote: >Based on the discussion from 26 October 2000 >[http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2000/10/26-minutes.html] as well as the more >recent threads, here's where we seem to be at today. > ><blockquote> >3.1 When an appropriate markup language exists and is supported, use markup >rather than raster-based images to convey information. [Priority 2] >For example, use SVG to create graphics, MathML to mark up mathematical >equations, and CSS for text-oriented special effects. Avoid using >raster-based images to represent text -- use text and style >sheets. Raster-based formats such as .gif and .jpeg paint the text as an >image and prevent scalable magnification of the text. >You may use text in images when: >1. the text does not convey its literal meaning but has a more graphical >function, such as a logo and >2. the effect can not be achieved with CSS and >3. you have provided a text equivalent for the image. >Refer also to guideline1, guideline 6 and guideline 11. ></blockquote> > >However, here's a new wrench: >Anne suggested that in my example for checkpoint 1.1 of a right arrow that >links to the next slide in a slide set, that the image ought to contain the >text "Next." >[http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2000OctDec/0478.html] In >this case, does this qualify as a "graphical function"? > > > > >-- >wendy a chisholm >world wide web consortium >web accessibility initiative >madison, wi usa >tel: +1 608 663 6346 >/-- > > Anne L. Pemberton http://www.pen.k12.va.us/Pav/Academy1 http://www.erols.com/stevepem/Homeschooling apembert@crosslink.net Enabling Support Foundation http://www.enabling.org
Received on Thursday, 14 December 2000 19:11:15 UTC