- From: Jamal Mazrui <Jamal.Mazrui@fcc.gov>
- Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 16:38:09 -0500
- To: "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
I like the choice of formats idea, as I find competing advantages of HTML and plain text as a screen reader user. If a periodical is not long or is of strong interest, I often prefer to receive it as full text within the body of a message, rather than having to go to a web site and navigate to individual articles. Sometimes, I use the continuous read feature of my screen reader at a high speech rate to read the whole newsletter, since this can be quicker overall than selecting, stopping, and starting on the most interesting parts. Frequently, I use a find command if I want to jump to a particular article, based on a search string I get from the table of contents at the beginning of the document. I think this newsletter standard is trying, in part, to make quick searches of this nature reliable, using generally unique sequences of symbols or words. Another factor is that if I have subscribed to a newsletter or magazine, especially if it is a commercial one, then I am likely to save each issue to my local computer for assured future availability, not dependent on an Internet connection or the company still being in business. Plain text format is compact compared to alternatives that add meta data for formatting and structure. Since my bookshelf is my computer, I can store a lot more material if saved as plain text. To be sure, there are trade-offs, since HTML, especially with the latest screen readers, provides flexible ways of navigating by structure, e.g., by headings or hyperlinks. The navigation links can also get in the way of efficient reading though. All this is to offer some perspective as to why adding a little structure to optimize plain text as a format might sometimes be preferrable to properly marked up HTML. Regards, Jamal -- Original Message -- From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Patrick H. Lauke Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 3:52 PM To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org Subject: Re: Text email newsletter standard Matthew Smith wrote: > I would raise a simple question: does a newsletter belong in the email > domain in the first place? [...] > Just the point of view of someone who does not like email attachments > and regards long email circulars (like newsletters) as being just as bad. I'd say it's about choice, about providing users with information in formats that are in line with the way they work and their preferences. In an ideal world, you'd give them a choice of text email, html email, newsletter on your website, RSS feed, Atom...may be overkill, but technically not that difficult if the source is held in a database or some easily transformable format (XML, even XHTML) -- Patrick H. Lauke _____________________________________________________ re*dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com
Received on Wednesday, 8 December 2004 21:38:43 UTC