- From: Al Gilman <asgilman@access.digex.net>
- Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 22:26:33 -0400 (EDT)
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
to follow up on what Jason White said: > > I hope that Al was not suggesting that the media type of BRAILLE be > abandoned in favour of TTY. > I think that there are pros and cons both ways. In my mind it is a question of what are the major differences and what are the minor differences. If one considers that the braille alphabets can be described by a character-set parameter outside of the styling, then modulo character set a braille display or embosser is only slightly different from its peers in the character-grid group as opposed to widely different from pixel-grid media whether screen or laser print. To fully characterize a Braille device as a display medium I believe you would have to indicate the size of the character grid, the character set (braille alphabet) used, and whether it is a dynamic refreshable display or a hardcopy write-once medium. Thus I need charset and size parameters beyond a TTY base type, and a "print" or "dynamic" modality. Calling this a variant of a TTY media type is plausible. And possibly economically smart. A stylesheet designed for a generic character-grid medium would work reasonably well for Braille page formatting. A stylesheet designed for a laser printer probably would not. You can still create another stylesheet that is even better for Braille. And it will be used at the right times if the stylesheet selection algorithm knows to look beyond the base type in the media indication before finally resolving what stylesheet to use. I am not assuming that authors will create only one stylesheet per base type. That is the point about presentation graphics. One doesn't use the same button GIFs on a big (number of pixels) projection device as one does on a small one. The projection medium, at least, will find people re-styling for parametric differences in the medium. If Braille is a base type in the media list, then you can still borrow a TTY stylesheet when there is no Braille stylesheet. You just have to make your stylesheet picking process smart enough to do that. It probably just costs you a manual step. When there is no compatible stylesheet that goes with the document you want to browse, the browser would ask you for what stylesheet you want to use and you should get to choose either the author's TTY stylesheet or your local Braille stylesheet. Whether you call Braille a base type or you bury it in the broader tty class, the available styles to the user are exactly the same. I don't want the Braille community to overlook existing adaptation capabilities such as character set and language parameters as they craft a complete Braille solution. If we can approach Braille as a class of variant sub-languages, we can probably adapt for it more economically than if we think it is a totally unique problem. That is the important point. If we can do that part right what you call it is not my primary concern. -- Al Gilman
Received on Friday, 17 October 1997 22:26:55 UTC