- From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
- Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 17:27:46 -0500
- To: Anne Pemberton <apembert@crosslink.net>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
At 05:02 PM 2000-12-29 -0800, Anne Pemberton wrote: >Al, > > As I learn what speech readers do with alt text I am somewhat confused >myself what should be there ... Usually I use a one or two word alt tag, >"frog", "Martin Luther King", etc., but if I'm trying harder, I may use >"drawing of frog", "photo of M. L. King" ... following this logic, I'd use >"Logo for Double-A Conformance, W3C-WAI Guidelines 1.0" ... That sounds pretty good to me. Time to link up with Kelly Ford, Neal Ewers, or someone like that to enter the "real-user testing" phase. Repeat an exercise like the one that Len ran in years of yore. Al PS: Another technique I would be interested to see represented in the popularity contest would be [frog]. That is to say, just use the simple nouns like what you said you see, but wrap them in square brackets to indicate that they are object inserts and not part of the narrative flow. I just don't know how many users would have to replay the text with punctuation on to get this, and how many in practice would ever take the trouble. Some of this is the motivation why some of us in PF are keen to see XHTML 2.0 move away from ALT as an attribute and toward something much more like the title and description attributes in SVG. Here one can put a range of options in the TITLE using RUBY markup (Yay, Charles!). Part of what I myself don't know is how universal is the practice of playing the synthetic speech with punctuation turned off, and how much the listeners get used to tuning out random nouns that pop up in illogical ways in the stream of speech. > > Anne > >At 10:47 AM 12/29/00 -0500, Al Gilman wrote: >>At 09:25 AM 2000-12-29 -0500, Leonard R. Kasday wrote: >>>Hmmm. Speaking of small problems with the logo, presently the image has >>> >>>ALT="Level Double-A conformance icon, W3C-WAI Web Content Accessibility >>>Guidelines 1.0" >>> >>>Following the principle that ALT should be an equivalent for what the >>>sighted person sees, would it not be better to have >>> >>>ALT="W3C: WAI triple A, WCAG 1.0." >>> >>>The longer description is an explanation that in principle is seen by >>>everyone, so it should be the TITLE >>> >>>TITLE="Level Double-A conformance icon, W3C-WAI Web Content Accessibility >>>Guidelines 1.0" >>> >> >>AG: >> >>I have to admit to a violent negative reaction to this suggestion. >> >>Both of the above spellings for ALT text satisfy the sense of 'equivalent' as >>used in checkpoint 1.1. It is a loose equivalence and they both meet this >>loose criterion. It is an equivalence of sense; not of spelling. And at the >>more superficial level that you are evaluating 'equivalence' in the above, >the >>answer is _no_, the ALT should not be 'equivalent' to the visual presentation >>_in those terms_. It should be _different_ in those terms so as to be >both a) >>equivalent at the deeper level and b) effective in the alternative >>presentation. The ALT text as understood when heard should be equivalent to >>what the sighted user understands on seeing the visual logo. "What the >>sighted >>user _sees_" is too medium-specific to be the base for equivalence >>comparison. >>"What the sighted user _learns_" is closer. >> >>The fact is that telegraphic diction such as exemplified by the suggested >>alternative ALT above works in a visual environment where the user can random >>scan over the component elements, and does not work well in a serial pass >over >>the content such as in synthetic speech. The more expanded version is more >>likely to be comprehensible when read aloud than is the series of cryptic >>blurps. >> >>I have to realize that the intensity of my reaction is probably because the >>distinction is subtle and sustaining a consensus for any resolution of such a >>subtle distinction is tenuous. >> >>Backing off from the initial reaction, I think that the meta-guideline that >>this suggestion violates is that "the ALT text should be easy to grasp >>(follow) >>when read aloud in context." >> >>This may sound like "the ALT text should be designed for how it appears in >>Lynx." That is my home base of experience and bias. But what the Lynx >>display >>communicates to me, the sighted, is some of what make the ALT text >>effective or >>ineffective communication in serial speech presentation. Which we do need to >>care about, even while it is not the only presentation we want to make >>effective. >> >>Al >> >>>Len >>> >>> >>>At 02:07 PM 12/26/00 -0500, Bailey, Bruce wrote: >>>>I hesitate to bring it up, but there is also the issue that the official >>>>versions have some flaws. There was the issues with .png files being >served >>>>instead of .gif (I think that's been resolved) and coming up blank with >some >>>>popular browsers. The WAI button don't use the "browser safe" palette and >>>>are larger (in bit depth and pixel size) than they need to be. The WAI >>>>conformance icons also don't match up nicely with the other W3C banner >>>>buttons (the "W3C" portion is too small). Take a look at the bottom of the >>>>W3C home page to see what I mean. It's been about a year since I first >>>>pointed these picayune problems out. Any chance they will be fixed? >>>> >>>> > -----Original Message----- >>>> > From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org >>[<<mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org%5DOn>mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org %5DOn><mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org%5DOn>mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.or g]On >>>> > Behalf Of Leonard R. Kasday >>>> > Sent: Monday, December 18, 2000 3:13 PM >>>> > To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org >>>> > Subject: local copies of WAI logo >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > Here's what I hope is a really simple question. >>>> > >>>> > The present conformance page >>>> > >><<http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG1-Conformance.html>http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG 1-Conformance.html><http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG1-Co>http://www.w3.org/WAI/WC AG1-Co >>nformance.html >>>> > >>>> > says to >>>> > reference the copy of the logo on the w3c servers >>>> > >>>> > <A >>href="<<http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG1A-Conformance>http://www.w3.org/WAI/WC AG1A-Conformance><http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG1A>http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG1A >>-Conformance" >>>> > title="Explanation of >>>> > Level A Conformance"> >>>> > <IMG height="32" width="88" >>>> > src="<<http://www.w3.org/WAI/wcag1A>http://www.w3.org/WAI/wcag1A><http://www .w3.org/WAI/wcag1A>http://www.w3.org/WAI/wcag1A" >>alt="Level >>A conformance >>>> > icon, W3C-WAI >>>> > Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0"></A> >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > Is there any problem in simply coping the logo onto the page? >>>> > In other >>>> > words, the only difference would be to replace src with something like >>>> > >>>> > src="images/wcag1A.gif" >>>> > >>>> > which refers to the local copy on the site? >>>> > >>>> > Len >>> >>>-- >>>Leonard R. Kasday, Ph.D. >>>Institute on Disabilities/UAP and Dept. of Electrical Engineering at Temple >>>University >>>(215) 204-2247 (voice) (800) 750-7428 (TTY) >>><<http://astro.temple.edu/~kasday>http://astro.temple.edu/~kasday><http: //astro.temple.edu/~kasday%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0>http://astro.temple.edu/ ~kasday >><<mailto:kasday@acm.org>mailto:kasday@acm.org><mailto:kasday@acm.org>mail to:kasday@acm.org >>> >>>Chair, W3C Web Accessibility Initiative Evaluation and Repair Tools Group >>><http://%3Chttp://www.w3.org/%3Ewww.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/>http://www.w3.org/ WAI/ER/IG/ >>> >>>The WAVE web page accessibility evaluation assistant: >>><<http://www.temple.edu/inst_disabilities/piat/wave/>http://www.temple.e du/inst_disabilities/piat/wave/><http://www.temple.edu/>http://www.temple.edu/ >>inst_disabilities/piat/wave/ >>> >> >> >Anne L. Pemberton ><http://www.pen.k12.va.us/Pav/Academy1>http://www.pen.k12.va.us/Pav/Academy1 ><http://www.erols.com/stevepem/Homeschooling>http://www.erols.com/stevepem /Homeschooling >apembert@crosslink.net >Enabling Support Foundation ><http://www.enabling.org/>http://www.enabling.org >
Received on Friday, 29 December 2000 17:23:41 UTC