Re: text as images...

Please note that the following appears in the errata for WCAG 1.0:
http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WAI-WEBCONTENT-ERRATA

<quote>
8. Text in images - clarification of checkpoint 3.1. 
Added: 3 January 2001 
Type: Clarification 
Refers to: Checkpoint 3.1 in 5 May 1999 version. 
Description (and correction). Checkpoint 3.1 should be reworded to read, "When an appropriate markup language exists and is supported, use markup rather than raster-based images to convey information. [Priority 2] 
For example, when supported, use SVG to create graphics, MathML to mark up mathematical equations, and CSS for text-oriented special effects. Avoid where possible using raster-based images to represent text -- use text and style sheets. Raster-based formats such as .gif and .jpeg paint the text as a series of pixels. When magnified the text becomes distorted. The ability to magnify text is critical for user with low vision.
You may use text in images when: 
the text does not convey its literal meaning but has a more graphical function, such as a logo and 
the effect can not be achieved with CSS and 
you have provided a text equivalent for the image. 
Refer also to Guideline 1, Guideline 6 and Guideline 11.
</quote>

Does this help any?

--wendy


At 08:54 PM 1/23/02, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
>see checkpoint 3.2: When an appropriate markup language exists, use markup
>rather than images to convey information.
>
>and the discussion recently, and the discussion on the topic in the archives
>for the end of 2000 - there are a numbner of threads there that are relevant.
>
>If a navigation bar consists of *images of text* then I think it breaks that
>checkpoint. If it ha  images with it, then I think it doesn't, and in
>addition it helps fulfill other checkpoints I think are important.
>
>As Kynn has pointed out, a page that has a text version (in the rendered
>content of the page) of text that is also provided in images doesn't break
>the spirit of the checkpoint, but might break the letter...
>
>Debating the points is important if we are going to produce a specification,
>and not just be a question-and-answer help list (there is a place for that,
>but I don't believe that is what WCAG is chartered to do).
>
>just a thought.
>
>chaals
>
>On Wed, 23 Jan 2002 gian@stanleymilford.com.au wrote:
>
>     (sent too soon!)
>      
>      Hi,
>      
>     However, nothing I have read has convinced me that having a
>     navigational bar that consists of images breaks level AA or level
>     AAA.
>       

-- 
wendy a chisholm
world wide web consortium 
web accessibility initiative
seattle, wa usa
/--

Received on Thursday, 24 January 2002 15:44:01 UTC