- From: Geoff Deering <gdeering@acslink.net.au>
- Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 09:26:20 +1100
- To: "Wendy A Chisholm" <wendy@w3.org>, "Charles McCathieNevile" <charles@w3.org>, <gian@stanleymilford.com.au>
- Cc: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
I think this is much better, much clearer, as we need to expand these checkpoints in some for of documentation to show; clarification, reason, rationalisation and example. I also feel we need to show not to be discouraging the use of appropriate graphics and multimedia, but to be encouraging using SVG and other appropriate tools. ----- Wendy A Chisholm Sent: Friday, 25 January 2002 7:43 AM Subject: 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 17:26:23 UTC