- From: Jim Thatcher <jim@jimthatcher.com>
- Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 10:16:39 -0600
- To: "'John M Slatin'" <john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Hi John, and welcome back from Spain.
> we were trying to make sure we'd accounted for instances where a single
> text alternative would not be enough to convey the same information as
> the non-text content.
I think the simplicity of 1.1.1 is wonderful like this.
1.1.1 For non-text content that is used to convey information, text
alternatives convey the same information.
and see no reason why this doesn't cover the possibility of more complex
text alternatives, including an identification plus a long description. But
to even suggest that an "identification" is generally warranted is not a
good idea.
Jim
Accessibility Consulting: http://jimthatcher.com/
512-306-0931
Received on Monday, 28 November 2005 16:17:10 UTC