- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@sidar.org>
- Date: Wed, 5 May 2004 06:25:21 -0500 (CDT)
- To: "David Harris" <david.harris@tcat.ac.uk>
- Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Hi David, yes there is quite a lot of work in this area. Unfortunately it has almost no profile at all in WAI discussions at the moment. There are several symbol sets that are implemente in a range of software (chat, email, document composition, etc) - Bliss, PCS, Widgit, and a couple of others whose names aren't at the tip of my tongue. If you follow Jonathan's work closer you might find references to the WWAAC group, and the CCF or Concept Coding Framework which they are developing [1]. This is a semantic-web based approach to identifying concepts, and then things that represent them - which turns out to work quite well for symbol-based systems, and in addition allows for easy customisation - for example I can use a photo of me instead of a symbol for "me". I can use SVG symbols so I can style things appropriately. Jonathan often talks about the red-bus/green-bus problem, where if people see a symbol for bus and it is red they interpret that as important, and ignore all the passing buses because they happen to be green. I did some mock-ups of how to do this in SVG, and hope to get a simple SVG-based demo quality authoring system running soon. You might like to look at an example (note that the RDF included uses a whole lot of undeclared dummy properties - it has the rough shape of the real thing, but has been "greeked" - dummy text used) [2]. One of the big issues is copyright - none of these symbol sets are freely available in the way that words and letters are - you have to pay for them. This has been a barrier to interoperability and communication. Again, interesting developments include the fact that the Unicode consortium are looking at including bliss symbols in Unicode, which would actually mean the specific concepts encoded by bliss, since the images that represent them are just like different fonts. So I think it isn't such a bad idea to develop symbols if you're going to give them away, but if you are not it would be cheaper, and probably more interoperable, to just buy a license for some software that includes a decent sized symbol set. [1] http://dewey.computing.dundee.ac.uk/ccf [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe/talks/20040309-charles/mesg.svg (you should be able to open it in an old browser and see something roughly right, or in Amaya to see something better) cheers Chaals -- Charles McCathieNevile charles@sidar.org http://www.sidar.org <quote who="David Harris"> > > I'm looking at making accessible an educational website for an FE college > and while looking at inclusiveness of people with learning difficulties, > Something struck me. I think, maybe a potential standardisation missing > which may help many people. > > What I'm interested in is the use of icons on web pages as the main > meaning > representation for links (see Jonathan Chetwynd's web site at > http://www.peepo.com for example). > > Is there any development of a global standard for meanings of icons / > pictograms so that meanings become standard like text? >
Received on Wednesday, 5 May 2004 07:29:59 UTC