- From: Jamie Mackay <Jamie.Mackay@cultureandheritage.govt.nz>
- Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 10:50:30 +1200
- To: "'Graham Oliver'" <graham_oliver@yahoo.com>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Bone idleness - good point though! -----Original Message----- From: Graham Oliver [mailto:graham_oliver@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 10:36 AM To: Jamie Mackay; 'David Poehlman'; Jeff Isom; w3c-wai-ig@w3.org Subject: RE: use of the "d" link for images Hey Jamie I really like the way that you have done things, any reason that you chose to leave out colour references? Cheers Graham --- Jamie Mackay <Jamie.Mackay@cultureandheritage.govt.nz> wrote: > Here is an example of what (I think) David is > talking about: > http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/dnzb_exhibs/lit/index.htm > > I tend to use both D links and Longdesc tags (though > this provokes a bug in > Bobby which complains about repeating the link > phrase.) Hopefully one day I > will be able to get rid of all the D tags, but in > the meantime I use link > titles to describe them. I don't think just > "description of previous image" > or something is adequate though is it? - surely the > description should refer > to the specific image if the link is going to be > read out with a bunch of > others? > > Jamie Mackay > > > The second question is what form it should take. I > preffer telling > people what is being described such as: "description > of web access > symbol". > another approach is to write a separate page and > provide a link such as: > "descriptins of images on this page". on the > separate page, you can > write the descriptions and title them accordingly. > you can even do this > any way and use d links to call up the appropriate > portions of the page > but this does not always work. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jeff Isom" <jeff@cpd2.usu.edu> > To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org> > Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2001 4:55 PM > Subject: use of the "d" link for images > > > I understand the purpose of the "d" link is to > provide the user with a > description of a complex graphic. Should all images > have "d" links or > only > those that are complex? In other words, although a > description of an > image > may not be essential to the content of the site, > would it be a good idea > to > give the user and opportunity to experience the > graphic in a more > meaningful > way? > > In addition, it seems that using the "d" tag could > be confusing to the > user > if there were a number of complex graphics on the > page. As the user > tabbed > throught the links they would hear "link d" . . . > "link d" . . . "link > d". > They would have to work to figure out what image the > link refers to. I > know > this is convention for describing images, but is it > the best approach? > > Jeff > > ----------------------------------- > Jeffrey Isom > Instructional Designer > Web Accessibility in Mind (http://www.webaim.org) > Center for Persons with Disabilities > Utah State University > Logan, Utah 84322-6800 > (435) 797-7582 > ===== <Start Signature> 'Making on-line information accessible' Email: graham_oliver@yahoo.com Phone: 64-9-360-1261 <End Signature> ____________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie
Received on Wednesday, 25 April 2001 18:53:21 UTC