- From: Daniel Dardailler <Daniel.Dardailler@sophia.inria.fr>
- Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 15:52:58 +0100
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
------- Forwarded Message Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 06:49:49 -0800 From: love26@gorge.net (William Loughborough) To: dd@w3.org Subject: Re: ALT tools (was: Censorship by laziness) At last! We are back to dealing with the *real* problem. If my comments diverted us a bit, I apologize. One could have a "helper's browser" so that *every time* one accessed a web site, one would be put into "repair mode" and such volunteers would automatically police the Web by merely surfing it. If the validation process yielded a "thumbs up" the volunteer wouldn't be conscripted into doing anything. If repairs were made they would be (automatically?) included in the "fixit" server. If volunteers are graded by the end users (repairs could be coded so that ineffective "taggers" could be educated) we could end up with "helpers' browsers" that were only in the hands of desirable taggers. I think your proposal is practical, and of course brilliant <g>. The only "twinge" I felt was when you said "degrade gracefully" and I prefer to think that a verbal description of a picture is a graceful *upgrade" - - I am "kidding on the square" about that. If any of this seems cogent, feel free to post it to the list. - -- Love. ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE http://dicomp.pair.com ------- End of Forwarded Message
Received on Friday, 23 January 1998 09:53:20 UTC