Re: The visual Web vs. seamless accessibility (was Re: RIT - Javascript)

RD:: "I maintain it's better to have too much information than not
enough..."

WL:: The discussion usually involves those who take that position and
those who get sick of hearing a TITLE="thin blue line separating section
A from section B" sort of droning away with no easy way to turn it off
and Bobby demanding it!

There may be a correlation between caring whether one's shirt color
clashes with the rest of the ensemble and wanting to know what those
"gratuitous graphics" contain.  Some of us rue that "clothes make the
man" is taken seriously, even literally, while others may think it
shouldn't matter, but does.

One suggestion that there be a "for decorative purposes only" label for
certain IMG thingies but the consensus has been that very few authors
regard *their* background images as non-informative.

If the only way to get ALT= in places where it is required for
accessibility is to put it *everywhere* that it's possible, then perhaps
we'll have to live with excess verbosity.

The notion that "In the beggining was The Word" is enhanced by being set
to music or having a special font or whatever seems absurd to me but I
am in a very small minority who thinks that "virtual reality" is an
oxymoron and that one's own imagination provides whatever "enhancement"
is suitable for emphasizing such as "we hold these truths to be..." and
that a great deal of what passes for visual/auditory improvements on
verbal content is author vanity.
-- 
Love.
            ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE
http://dicomp.pair.com

Received on Monday, 4 May 1998 17:20:53 UTC