- From: Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>
- Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 02:04:27 -0000
- To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
>"Al Gilman": >What is being debated here IIRC is: suppose the author does use SVG -- is this >placing an unreasonable burden on the users? Is modifying the browser to >process SVG illustrations a reasonable expectation on users, or is this an >unreasonable expectation for certain groups of people with disabilities and we >need an alternative approach for them? I was trying to think wider than just SVG and 3.4, what level of plug-in/non "standard" equipment[1] is an author allowed to use to fulfil a requirement, users should go some way (and most do of course), so is it okay to require a plug-in? and if so, any plug-in, free plug-ins only, free but on restricted platform/O/S? - What is reasonable? - I'm not sure. I think users have to have some responsibility, and if they can install a plug-in at low cost, then that should be an ok (minimum you can do), but not recommended way of fulfilling the requirement. Jim.
Received on Sunday, 28 October 2001 21:14:17 UTC