- From: Steve Donie <sdonie@zycor.lgc.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 13:25:25 -0600
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Sometimes it is built into the Text-To-Speech rules. Most synthesizers and speech engines support what is sometimes called a "dictionary" to do just this. Some screen readers also do - I know that the old VERT screen reader for DOS had this capability, and I imagine that some of the Windows screen readers have this as well. It is usually up to the user to set them up though. An interesting thing happened when I was working on the "Narrator" program (a very simple MSAA-based, screen-reader like program) that is going to be included in Windows 2000 (AKA NT5). I can't remember the exact scenario, but it tried to read (C:) as "C smiley face", when it was just the drive "C:" in parenthesis. The Narrator program didn't do the translation - it was the Text-To-Speech engine. Steve Donie -----Original Message----- From: Marti [mailto:marti47@MEDIAONE.NET] Sent: Friday, January 15, 1999 11:17 AM To: waz@easynet.co.uk; w3c-wai-ig@w3.org Subject: Re: emotica, ASCII art and accessibility - some suggestions 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 >> > >
Received on Friday, 15 January 1999 14:30:04 UTC