- From: Slaydon, Eugenia <ESlaydon@beacontec.com>
- Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 16:59:35 -0500
- To: "'Charles McCathieNevile'" <charles@w3.org>, gian@stanleymilford.com.au
- Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
I still have to disagree. Navigation icons provide visual clues that CSS just can't duplicate yet. Saying that they are inappropriate in an accessible page is a harsh statement. I fully support your first statement of providing both icons and text labels. I feel that it best supports accessibility for *all* users. Eugenia Slaydon Lead Content Developer Beacon Technologies, Inc. 336-931-1295 ext 225 -----Original Message----- From: Charles McCathieNevile [mailto:charles@w3.org] Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 4:41 PM To: gian@stanleymilford.com.au Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org Subject: RE: rationalize presentation [was: Use consistent presentation] Well, SVG has a lot of promise as a way to do what we really want. I think what we actually want is to be able to provide both navigation icons, and text labels. I agree that SVG isn't going to be relied on in a conservatively designed website for the next few months, so we really get to having old image formats, and text. I do feel that CSS is sufficiently well implemented in currently used browsers, so that using bitmap images of text in place of styled text is not appropriate in an HTML page that claims to be accessible to a reasonable degree. cheers Chaals On Tue, 15 Jan 2002 gian@stanleymilford.com.au wrote: I don't believe an appropriate markup exists that can convey the same information that images in navigation bars do. It would be a sad day for accessibility if the only way to make a AA or AAA site would be to remove graphical navigation bars.
Received on Tuesday, 15 January 2002 16:56:30 UTC