W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2005

RE: Proposal with updates from 26 May call

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 12:39:53 -0500
To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20050527173953.B70C960C149@m18.spamarrest.com>

I concur.

I think that spoken versions of text is beyond level 3.  Not a bad idea for
some places or content - but there are too many variables and the
application would be too specialized.  

We can capture in our list of "other things that might be considered for
particular sites or content" (in advisory / other information section
techniques not guidelines doc).  But not as an SC. 

 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 

-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Ineke van der Maat
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 11:50 AM
To: Yvette Hoitink
Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: Re: Proposal with updates from 26 May call

Hello Yvette,

You wrote:
> If we do want a success criterion about spoken versions of text, I 
> think we should include that it has to be the user's choice, i.e.: 
> "The user can select a spoken version of text content" or something 
> similar.

I really think to skip the whole requirement is the best way. When users
want to listen to text, they only need to put on their screenreaders. Also
for other platforms than windows screen readers are  developped the last
Advantage also: users can always have the same settings they are used to.

Ineke van der Maat
Received on Friday, 27 May 2005 17:39:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 21:07:39 UTC