- From: cait hurley <cait@london.virgin.net>
- Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 17:30:29 +0000
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
...in which case, we should lobby in a nice way to established screen reader companies. Does anyone have a list and we can co-ordinate a "Hey, wouldn't this be a good idea, and guess what - we've worked out how you can do it as well" type semi-campaign. ... er, or something similar! At 12:17 15/01/99 -0500, you wrote: >You got my vote! I may be the one that complained but I really am all for >more accessibility not less. If my screen reader said smile and wink >instead of gobbeldegook it would be great. >I don't know if there are screen readers that do that >-----Original Message----- >From: waz@easynet.co.uk <waz@easynet.co.uk> >To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org> >Date: Friday, January 15, 1999 11:05 AM >Subject: emotica, ASCII art and accessibility - some suggestions > > >>In terms of proposing ASCII representations for things in online >>communication, without regard to whether or not the 'Air Hug' suggestion >>is something that will or will not catch on, the following things >>occurred to me: >> >>Things divide into two categories here - the small scale, 'inline' >>emoticon type ASCII stuff, like smileys, and the large scale graphical >>extravaganzas of full-blown multi-line ASCII artwork. Neither one is >>intrinsically accessible, and in terms of the second, I believe that the >>fact that there are as many accessiblity problems as there are with >>other kinds of graphics will not stop anyone from using it. ASCII art is >>out there and will not die - it is a shame that it is in the category of >>artwork that cannot necessarily be appreciated by all, but perhaps those >>who cannot see it will come to regard it in the same way that I >>personally regard opera - I ignore it and save time. The sensible >>compromise seems to me to suggest that ASCII art should only be used in >>sites and documents that either relate to ASCII art itself or that have >>some other kind of intrinsic accessibility issue. A special kind of PRE >>tag would be good, with an ALT of some sort, and then we could use ASCII >>art, and would have some way of making it accessible and dealing with >>the large online legacy of currently inaccessible-due-to-ascii-artwork >>documents. >> >>Meanwhile, the inline emoticons and smileys are so widely distributed >>online as to have attained, as far as I can tell, the equivalent of >>language status, in a sense, so it isn't a question of telling people to >>stop using them, because they wont. Perhaps a solution might be to get >>screen readers to have a list of the most commonly used ones and >>translate them accordingly. Such a list could be managed centrally by >>the WAI, in the form of a simple text file, with each line containing >>the emoticon and the description seperated by tabs (or something), which >>screenreaders could update the latest version of on a regular basis and >>use to translate every :), :-) X| and ~;) they come across. and it >>should be two way - with an 'insert' smiley option - after all, why >>shouldn't users of screenreaders be able to use 'winking smiley' or >>whatever as well as anyone. >> >>Maintaining this file would be a reasonable amount of work, I imagine, >>especially as there may not be universal agreement on the best way to >>translate each of the major emoticons into each language required, but >>it seems to me worthwhile in the sense that I feel strongly that >>solutions to accessibility issues ought to try to bring everyone in to >>what is already there, not to reduce what is already there to what >>everyone can already see, as well as making sure that all the new stuff >>is universally accessible too. >> >>I would be happy to help sort this out to the extent that I am able, >>though I am not an expert on either emoticons or screenreaders - >>certainly there already exist many listings of 'yer basic online >>emoticons' - and I thought I'd seen one on the w3c site itself once >>(though I can't find it right now) - surely it's just a question of >>finding a list to build a canonical central list from, making sure the >>suggestion gets directed at screenreader writers and sorting it out with >>next versions of screenreader software. do no current screenreaders have >>a 'set this sequence of characters to mean this phrase' option? forwards >>or backwards? >> >>Apologies if this has all been hashed over before. >> >>cheers etc., >> >>wayne >> >>> The idea of an 'Air Hug' may be great but ..those slashes and dots are >not >>> very helpful for those of us who use screen readers. I would not like to >see >>> their use expanded. >>> Marti >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Robert C. Neff <rcn@fenix2.dol-esa.gov> >>> To: 'w3c-wai-ig@w3.org' <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org> >>> Date: Friday, January 15, 1999 8:27 AM >>> Subject: suggestion >>> >>> >To those who are not familiar with the slang "Air Hug", here is an >example. >>> > If you appreciate what someone has done and this act warrants a hug but >>> >are separated by distance (short, long, or over the internet) and cannot >>> >render the hug. You can extend your arms and pretend to hug and say "Air >>> >Hug" >>> > >>> >As I have not seen an ascii representation for an "Air Hug", I propose >< >>> >\../ > and for a "GREAT BIG AIR HUG" < \\..// > >>> > >>> >Obviously I am in a good mood! >>> > >>> >Rob >>> > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- Cait Hurley 0171 479 4420 Producer, Member Services ICQ: 1257510 http://www.virgin.net/vnet/ pager:01523 149804 -------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Friday, 15 January 1999 12:30:34 UTC