- From: David Poehlman <poehlman1@home.com>
- Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 13:59:05 -0500
- To: "Charles F. Munat" <chas@munat.com>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Charles, answering both you and bob here, you hinted at an answer in your message below when you mention that the screen reader is going to be sharply and exclusively focused where intended to be in this case. To raise the bar on this, make the content rich in text for the text user and you define it as something that should have focus. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles F. Munat" <chas@munat.com> To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org> Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 1:44 PM Subject: Re: background-image in CSS Access Systems wrote: > don't people with screen readers have a right to the "effect" you think is > usefull for some people but not others. Why the difference? Do you > think that visually impaired folks cannot get an "effect" or that they > don't deserve that "effect"?????? Having seen the page in question, the actual background image is a pattern of black and gray horizontal stripes, one pixel wide. The effect it creates is to cause the text area -- which has a white background -- to pop out, focusing the reader's eyes. No description of the image will have a similar effect for non-visual users, and, in fact, it is probably unneccessary because a screen reader focuses the user's attention similarly already. I don't think that Ineke believes that non-visual users should be deprived of anything. But this brings up an interesting question: how does one convey the equivalent meaning to a non-visual user? Charles F. Munat Seattle, Washington
Received on Friday, 18 January 2002 13:59:08 UTC