- 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 I have recently read that IRC is outdated, but the article that I read may be outdated itself.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