- From: James Craig <wai-ig@cookiecrook.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:43:02 -0600
- To: George Kerscher <kerscher@montana.com>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
George Kerscher wrote: > TIP: Sometimes people will use colons and other > punctuation to do this. Screen readers > do not work with ASCII art like :-) so spell > out (smile) or (wink) etc as words. Good advice. (grin) > SUGGESTION 5: If new text is inserted within the body of the > old message, use your initials enclosed in angle > brackets to identify the beginning of your > comment. Close your comment with the > angle bracket slash. For example: <gv>comment by > Greg</gv> or <gk>here is George's comment</gk> BE > CONSISTENT so that a person using a screen reader > can use text search to find all your comments. But angle brackets are a standard method of quote indention. Many GUI mail readers will display these sections differently: with a border or a different color. Visually impaired users can likewise use this construct to understand quoting levels. Consistency is the key here. How is a screen reader supposed to understand what random XML tags are supposed to mean? Not all mailing list audiences are as technically proficient as this one. It seems to me that unlabeled XML in plain text email would confuse more people that it would help. > SUGGESTION 6: Do not use indenting to show organization of > thought or material unless you also include Outline > Labels such as 1,2,3 and a b c, or full word > labels. > > Rationale: Spacial indenting is not detected by persons > using screen reading packages. This is a form > of visual formatting. I don't thing you should indent at all. You are including tab characters in plain text email, which are rendered in different character widths on many systems and fonts. Especially when using proportional fonts, not even spaces are rendered the same width. I like to read my mail in a monospace font. You indentions showed up disorganized on my display. All you other suggestions seem very useful. Thanks! James -- http://cookiecrook.com/
Received on Thursday, 26 February 2004 18:43:03 UTC