- From: John M Slatin <john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu>
- Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 14:40:10 -0500
- To: "Joe Clark" <joeclark@joeclark.org>, "WAI-GL" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Joe, please see messages from me, Paul Bohman, and others about this issue. They're in the list archive from back in the Spring, and the subject line reads as follows: RE: REF 1.1a - Add definition to 1.1 for ability to be expressed in words As you'll see if you follow that thread, there are a number of people in the working group who share at least some of your belifes about the complex relationships between words and images and would like to find better language for this and related checkpoints. Please give us a concrete suggestions for language we might be able to use and I assure you we'll consider it. Thanks. John John Slatin, Ph.D. Director, Institute for Technology & Learning University of Texas at Austin FAC 248C 1 University Station G9600 Austin, TX 78712 ph 512-495-4288, f 512-495-4524 email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu web http://www.ital.utexas.edu -----Original Message----- From: Joe Clark [mailto:joeclark@joeclark.org] Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2003 12:56 pm To: WAI-GL Subject: Re: [320] Ability to be expressed in words > Ability to be expressed in words > This refers to content whose function or intended purpose can be > expressed accurately and unambiguously in a reasonable number of words > (for example, diagrams, charts, illustrations,etc.) I repeat my complaint that WAI and the WCAG WG continue to delude themselves that everything can be boiled down to a "reasonable number of words," i.e., "diagrams, charts, illustrations, etc." are actually superfluous and offer no marginal benefit over "reasonable number[s]" of words. WAI and WCAG WG members obviously, after having had four years to study this issue, still fail to understand that people draw "diagrams, charts, illustrations" because *data relationships cannot be adequately summed up in words*. Words-words-words: That's all WAI wants on every Web page everywhere, save of course for those Web pages that must be "supplemented" with "non-text content" for people with learning disabilities. It is false to contend that "diagrams, charts, illustrations" categorically constitute content that can be expressed in words. WAI and the WCAG WG continue to flaunt their ignorance of the philosophy and practice of "diagrams, charts, illustrations," yet WAI and WCAG WG have the temerity to dictate to the rest of the world that "diagrams, charts, illustrations" can be "expressed accurately and unambiguously in a reasonable number of words." I'll give you the same homework assignment I gave you before: <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ig/2003JanMar/0291.html> Take ten examples from each of Edward Tufte's volumes and "express [them] accurately and unambiguously in a reasonable number of words." WAI and WCAG WG peck away at picayune peripheral issues, tending to get even those wrong, and never quite twig to the fact that their central themes are even more wrong. -- Joe Clark | joeclark@joeclark.org Author, _Building Accessible Websites_ <http://joeclark.org/access/> | <http://joeclark.org/book/>
Received on Saturday, 23 August 2003 02:58:39 UTC