- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 13 Jun 1999 15:04:47 -0400 (EDT)
- To: David Poehlman <poehlman@clark.net>
- cc: Anne Pemberton <apembert@crosslink.net>, Kynn Bartlett <kynn-hwg@idyllmtn.com>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
David, you have touched on an important point here. There is a difference between understanding what the requirements are, and being able to put them into practise. And in the case of 'the clearest language which is appropriate', or 'appropriate graphic or multimedia ilustration', or 'appropriate textual equivalent', the decision ultimately rests on questions of style. There are, however, some general principles which can guide the developer as to what is likely to be appropriate. If it is possible to know what is clearly wrong, and what is clearly right, then it is easier to decide whether something new is likely to be right or wrong. And as you have pointed out, if dancing penguins seem to be the appropriate thing, there are some guidelines about how they should be incorporated in an accessible page. cheers Charles McCN On Fri, 11 Jun 1999, David Poehlman wrote: looking at the issue for a week now, here is what we are up against. the wai guidelines as they stand, state that if you do certain things, there must be things done that ensure that technologies other than perhaps your high end browser can access them. What is wished for by non readers is that content be delivered and composed in such a way as to make it understandable. we've been talking about the fundamental difference here. My proposed guidelines do nothing really for non readers and may even overlap what the wai already has. I will not write my site and don't know how to write my site because I lack the vision to do it in such a way as to make it richly rewarding for the non reader unless I know that the non reader is going to be a large part of my paying audience or unless I am specifically being contracted to do it. I'd have to have help with this at any rate. as things now, with a bit of help for visual stuff, I can write good well designed web sites that are easy to read and comprehend because I must have easy to read and comprehend sites in order to get any thing out of them because complex sites are tough for me personally to deal with. Does this help at all? It comes down here unfortunately then to a matter of site style. If you choose to populate your site with neat little dancing figures or grapfruit or singing birds, then, follow all the other guidelines. -- Hands-On Technolog(eye)s Touching The Internet: mailto:poehlman@clark.net Voice: 301.949.7599 ftp://ftp.clark.net/pub/poehlman http://poehlman.clark.net Dynamic Solutions Inc. Best of service for your small business network needs! http://www.dnsolutions.com ---sig off--- --Charles McCathieNevile mailto:charles@w3.org phone: +1 617 258 0992 http://www.w3.org/People/Charles W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI MIT/LCS - 545 Technology sq., Cambridge MA, 02139, USA
Received on Sunday, 13 June 1999 15:04:52 UTC