Re: Illustrations on web sites (was RE: Self-voicing browsers)

William,

	Your reply seems to support my original statement. Perhaps WCAG would be
better received if there were clear statements that graphics and
multimedia, properly coded and tagged, are *necessary* for many folks with
disabilities. 

				Anne

At 11:07 AM 10/17/1999 -0700, William Loughborough wrote:
>AP:: "The idea that the web can be made "more accessible" by decreasing
>the use of graphics or multimedia needs to be replaced..."
>
>WL: The notion that the guidelines aim to "decrease use of graphics" is
>totally erroneous. In every case the language of guidelines,
>checkpoints, and techniques/examples is not directed towards reduction
>of multimedia events but in their enhancement. The misguided but
>prevalent impression that WAI's purpose is to turn the Web into a deadly
>dull, boring text-only medium is quite simply *wrong* and forms one of
>the main barriers to WCAG acceptance. Because there is emphasis on
>matters of access for blind people in no way means that this is the
>*only* group of PWDs of interest to WAI but that so many access problems
>for them are generally illustrative of the problems that necessitate the
>Initiative in the first place.
>
>-- 
>Love.
>            ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE
>http://dicomp.pair.com
>
Anne L. Pemberton
http://www.pen.k12.va.us/Pav/Academy1
http://www.erols.com/stevepem/Homeschooling
apembert@crosslink.net
Enabling Support Foundation
http://www.enabling.org

Received on Sunday, 17 October 1999 20:30:01 UTC