- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 07:46:45 -0500 (EST)
- To: Anne Pemberton <apembert@crosslink.net>
- cc: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
I also don't think that text is first-among-equals. It is simply a requirement among equals. Normally, it happens to be particularly easy to do, and for those for whom it is a requirement it makes a great difference. So it falls into the category of extremely low hanging fruit, and I don't know of a credible excuse for not having it. By contrast, developing graphics that convey a meaning is harder, therefore more expensive. On the other hand, they are helpful to an extremely large part of the community. my 2 centimes... Charles McCN On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, Anne Pemberton wrote: Al, Text cannot be "more equal" in the old "Animal Farm" sense and still meet the needs of the non-text people. No matter how many times we point to this little piece of the document or that, the overwhelming sense of the guidelines is "more than equal" status of text. So much so, that the 508 guidelines don't even suggest that the accessibility features they proscribe are useful outside of the blind community. Anne At 11:25 PM 1/2/01 -0500, Al Gilman wrote: >Somehow we have to communicate both a first-among-equals status for text >without going to Lombardiesque excess. Yes, today, text is the most important >thing; but definitely not the only thing. Because yes, there are people for >whom it is the _last_ thing they need. > >Al 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 -- Charles McCathieNevile mailto:charles@w3.org phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136 W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053, Australia until 6 January 2001 at: W3C INRIA, 2004 Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Wednesday, 3 January 2001 07:46:47 UTC