RE: the text in images issue [was: errata...]

Yes, I understand and agree that images should be paired with words.  This
is a fundamental concept in transitioning symbol-oriented users of
Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) to literacy.  This isn't
really the argument.
Even with regard to images maps and buttons, no one has said that text
should be avoided.  What should be avoided is graphical text.
The "arrow button" should NOT have text unless the it is put there by CSS or
SVG or redundant text links.  "Pop-up" text provided via ALT or TITLE
mechanism is fine.  Bit-mapped words are NOT acceptable.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of Anne Pemberton
> Sent: Friday, December 15, 2000 10:08 AM
> To: William Loughborough; Wendy A Chisholm; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Errata for WCAG 1.0 checkpoint 3.1 (i.e. the 
> text in images
> issue)
> 
> 
> What if it does? The arrow without words doesn't distinguish 
> between next
> story and next page either...
> 
> 					Anne
> 
> At 05:17 PM 12/14/00 -0800, William Loughborough wrote:
> >At 06:38 PM 12/14/00 -0800, Anne Pemberton wrote:
> >>The use of the arrows without a word has to be TAUGHT and 
> LEARNED ...
> >
> >Unlike the use of the word without the arrows? Please!  What 
> if "next" 
> >means the next story instead of the next page.
> >
> >--
> >Love.
> >                 ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE
> >
> >
> 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 Friday, 15 December 2000 12:26:28 UTC