RE: Glossary "non-text content" Small Nit

I think we get into more trouble rather than less with this suggestion.
For instance, the PDF user agent function for *displaying* text works
even for text that does not have a Unicode mapping. 

And making our definitions depend on user agent functionality will get
circular when we try to decide on what technologies are included in
baselines.

Loretta Guarino Reid
lguarino@adobe.com
Adobe Systems, Acrobat Engineering 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG
> Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 10:18 AM
> To: Loretta Guarino Reid; 'Gregg Vanderheiden'; 'Chris Ridpath'; 'WAI
WCAG
> List'
> Subject: RE: Glossary "non-text content" Small Nit
> 
> 
> And why don't take suggestion from Section 508 (? 1194.21 letter f):
> "Content that is not provided through operating system functions for
> displaying text."
> 
> We could change "operating system" with "user agent".
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On
> Behalf
> Of Loretta Guarino Reid
> Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 6:52 PM
> To: Gregg Vanderheiden; Chris Ridpath; WAI WCAG List
> Subject: RE: Glossary "non-text content" Small Nit
> 
> 
> 
> I am worried about the proposed change because it seems to rule out
things
> like PDF's presentation of text, where a mapping is available from the
> content to the Unicode representation, but the "native" representation
is
> not Unicode.
> 
> Loretta Guarino Reid
> lguarino@adobe.com
> Adobe Systems, Acrobat Engineering
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org]
On
> > Behalf Of Gregg Vanderheiden
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 9:04 AM
> > To: 'Chris Ridpath'; 'WAI WCAG List'
> > Subject: RE: Glossary "non-text content" Small Nit
> >
> >
> > I think this wording (Chris's) is much better at getting at the
> problem
> >
> > Unless I hear otherwise - I am changing the text we will review
later
> to
> > this wording.  This allows us to get rid of the awkwardly worded
note.
> >
> > Thanks Chris.
> >
> > Others - comment if you see a hole.
> >
> >
> >
> > Gregg
> >
> >  -- ------------------------------
> > 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 Chris Ridpath
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 8:43 AM
> > To: WAI WCAG List
> > Subject: Glossary "non-text content" Small Nit
> >
> >
> > Our glossary defines non-text content as "Content that is not
> represented
> > by
> > a Unicode character or sequence of Unicode characters".
> >
> > Images and other binary content are often converted to Unicode
> characters
> > for transmission over the Internet. It could be interpreted that
> images
> > and
> > other binary content can be represented as Unicode characters which
is
> not
> > the intent of our glossary term.
> >
> > I suggest that we add the text "in its native format" to the
glossary
> term
> > so it reads:
> >
> > "Content that is not represented by a Unicode character or sequence
of
> > Unicode characters in its native format."
> >
> > There is a note in the Wiki stating:
> > It is possible to encrypt or encode any content including binary
files
> > using Unicode characters but that would not "represent the content
> > using
> Unicode
> > characters."
> >
> > I think that the character encoded file does represent (stand for,
> > symbolize) the original file. If we add the "in its native format"
> text
> > then
> > this note could be removed.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Chris
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 12 October 2005 17:23:27 UTC