- From: David Poehlman <poehlman1@comcast.net>
- Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 17:44:56 -0500
- To: "Christian Seus" <cas@ichp.edu>
- Cc: "WAI \(E-mail\)" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
I use irc when I chat at all mostly because it does not send me through
hoops to use it. There are a couple of home grown systems that aren't
bad but they are especially developped for a particular situation and
are not widely used.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christian Seus" <cas@ichp.edu>
To: "David Poehlman" <poehlman1@comcast.net>
Cc: "WAI (E-mail)" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 12:54 PM
Subject: RE: Accessable Chat
David,
Thank you. Have you used any of these systems. IRC specifically? I
have recently read that IRC is outdated, but the article that I read may
be outdated itself.
Christian
-----Original Message-----
From: David Poehlman [mailto:poehlman1@comcast.net]
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 7:09 AM
To: Charles McCathieNevile; Christian Seus
Cc: WAI (E-mail)
Subject: Re: Accessable Chat
and some attempts have been aimed at making irc more pictorially
available for these groups as well and the windows clients for irc have
become fairly visually oriented but still remain at least to a great
degree accessible to those not utillizing images.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles McCathieNevile" <charles@w3.org>
To: "Christian Seus" <cas@ichp.edu>
Cc: "WAI (E-mail)" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 6:16 AM
Subject: Re: Accessable Chat
My very personal 2 cents worth:
I would be extremely unhappy about a health-care related system that was
inaccessible. If it were not possible to find an alternative I would, of
course undertstand.
Anyway, I think the most widely accessible chat system (except for
people
with significant intellectual disabilities, or difficulty typing and no
voice
input systems - both groups who are not well-served by most existing
chat
systems) is based on IRC - there are any number of clients, including
some
that work well with screen readers, some rudimentary attempts at
producing
them to work well for various other users, and it is available on
virtually
every software platform.
Charles McCN
On Thu, 7 Mar 2002, Christian Seus wrote:
I am looking for opinions and experiences on accessible chat rooms.
I am in the market to purchase a chat program that could be used as an
added feature on mostly health care related websites.
Is there an accessible chat program that is currently on the market?
Has anyone used accessible chat programs with a great ease of use?
What would be your stance on a website that had a chat room that
wasn't accessible to all users? Do you just not have chat? Or would
you tolerate it?
Thank you for your thoughts,
Christian
Christian Seus
Technology Specialist
Division of Policy and Program Affairs
Institute for Child Health Policy
5700 SW 34th Street, Suite 323
Gainesville, FL 32608
Toll-Free (888) 433-1851
Phone: (352) 392-5904 x.275
Fax: (352) 392-8822
E-mail: cas@ichp.edu
Web: <www.ichp.edu>
-----Original Message-----
From: Charles McCathieNevile [mailto:charles@w3.org]
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 10:10 AM
To: Access Systems
Cc: WAI (E-mail)
Subject: RE: GW Micro Helps Make Macromedia Flash Content Accessible
to People Who Are Blind
On Wed, 6 Mar 2002, Access Systems wrote:
On Wed, 6 Mar 2002, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
> ASCII text is not a solution that works. "ASCII art" - using text
characters
> and layout to represent graphic content - is an extremely poor
choice for
> making graphics that can be presented to users of braille, or
people using
wasn't suggesting that it be used for graphics, your right almost no
way a
person using a braille or text to speech reader could understand it.
that is where the alt tag is handy
OK, so it seems we are in agreement on that bit.
Bob also said
I was pretty sure there was a text set for most languages, I have
seen the
Japanese version
[snip]
there is no one single method that everyone can use, but there is a
single
language that every computer can use and that is ASCII.
CMN
OK, I think we are getting closer. ASCII is a way of encoding a
particular
set of characters - those used in American English. (Actually not all
computers can use it - IBM computers used a different system for a
long
time...) There are equivalent systems for other kinds of characters -
and
Unicode (also called ISO-10646, or some other names) is the one most
commonly
recommended because it includes almost all characters used today, some
no
longer used, and some for only strange usages like the "klingon
language"
invented by fans of star trek. (In 64000 characters I guess the first
few
people to add their own silly ideas get to have a bit of space. I
would
have preferred Mayan, but there are probably more speakers of
Klingon!).
CHeers
Chaals
--
Charles McCathieNevile http://www.w3.org/People/Charles phone: +61
409 134 136
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI fax: +1
617 258 5999
Location: 21 Mitchell street FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia
(or W3C INRIA, Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex,
France)
Received on Monday, 11 March 2002 17:45:09 UTC