- From: Samuel Rinnetmäki <w3wai@puoli.net>
- Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 10:25:09 +0200 (EET)
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
>> To play devil's advocate: shouldn't they be using a screen magnifier or
>> something like Opera's page zoom, which scales both text and graphics ?
> Tiny symbols that may or may not carry meaning and implemented as
> graphical elements -is- a problem for that specific group; both as
> links and as information carrying elements.
You can use style sheets to allow the graphis to grow and shrink with the
text:
img.asterisk { width: 0.5em; height: 0.5em;}
Is there a problem with that?
> What's wrong with just adding "mandatory", or "required" in plain text
> to the label ?
If there are ten mandatory fields in a form, those "mandatory" strings
begin to become annoying, IMO. Of course, the first thing to ask is,
whether the ten pieces of information really are necessary for processing
the information submitted with the form. In most cases, they are not. In
some cases, they are.
Simplified, graphical presentation can make it easier for the user to
distinguish the mandatory elements quickly, reducing the time it would
take them to read the text of all the labels in the form.
Samuel
Received on Thursday, 5 February 2004 03:25:24 UTC