- From: Anne Pemberton <apembert@erols.com>
- Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2001 06:38:40 -0400
- To: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>, William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
- Cc: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.EDU.AU>, Web Content Accessibility Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Oops, I forget the address: http://www.erols.com/stevepem/guidelines/whitehouse.html Anne At 06:59 PM 4/3/01 -0400, Anne Pemberton wrote: >At Charles request I have hung the Whitehouse page on my site along with >current graphics. Inserted in the text are text descriptions of the >pictures that should go there. I do not have any extra pictures, just >descriptions of what the pictures should be to make this page usable if the >text were "greeked out" ... > > Anne > >At 04:31 AM 4/3/01 -0400, Charles McCathieNevile wrote: >>William, I am standing virtually by your side, though bytes may be rained >>upon me... >> >>I think the most appropriate way of explaining what is needed are examples, >>and this will take us some time at our current rate of production (one image >>in WCAG 2, 4 icons and about a dozen images in ATAG techs, ...). They will >>also need to be backed up with some general explanation of what we are trying >>to accomplish, and why the examples are good ones (or not). >> >>Similar to the way that we actually explain what is reqiured as an equivalent >>alternative by providing examples. (But they are easier to do <grin/>) >> >>I think this stuff is all techniques material - supporting information, that >>should explain how to do something, abd how to check if it has been done >>(these may not be the same part - see the latest group draft of techniques >>for authoring tool accessibility >http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/WD-ATAG10-TECHS-20010319/ >>as an example of how these <em>might<em> be split). >> >>cheers >> >>chaals >> >> >>On Mon, 2 Apr 2001, William Loughborough wrote: >> >> At 06:09 PM 4/2/01 -0400, Anne Pemberton wrote: >> >... I wouldn't want to say how many graphics per page indicate it's >> >properly "illustrated", but will we have to? >> >> As the guidelines document itself becomes more self-reflexive in this >> regard we can talk more honorably about this matter. As a group we should >> take it upon ourselves to provide illustrations that illustrate the >> importance of illustration. >> >> I have tried, however naively to make a start in this direction >> [http://pair.com/xguide.htm] as has Wendy in her "icon" accompanying >> checkpoint 3.4 [http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/#supplement-text]. >> >> I think it should become a regular topic on the list - suggested >> illustrations and discussions thereof. The time is past when we can >> straight-facedly claim that they are either impossible or unimportant. >> >> I hope I am not alone in this stand? >> >> -- >> Love. >> ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE >> >> >>-- >>Charles McCathieNevile http://www.w3.org/People/Charles phone: +61 409 >134 136 >>W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI fax: +1 617 >258 5999 >>Location: 21 Mitchell street FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia >>(or W3C INRIA, Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, >France) >> >> >Anne Pemberton >apembert@erols.com > >http://www.erols.com/stevepem >http://www.geocities.com/apembert45 > > Anne Pemberton apembert@erols.com http://www.erols.com/stevepem http://www.geocities.com/apembert45
Received on Wednesday, 4 April 2001 06:32:52 UTC