W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2014

Re: Success criteria speak for themselves

From: Ramón Corominas <listas@ramoncorominas.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 01:06:49 +0100
Message-ID: <53069899.9020000@ramoncorominas.com>
To: Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>
CC: Wayne Dick <waynedick@knowbility.org>, Lucy Greco <lgreco@berkeley.edu>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Hi again,

Just in case... I completely agree with you in the advantages and need 
of good semantics. What I am discussing here is if HTML semantics are 
the *only* way of conveying the visual information in a 
"programmatically determinable" way, which is quite different from 
saying "semantics are not useful".

I also think that it's impossible to convey every visual aspect of a 
design to everyone, but it doesn't imply not tring it <smile>

Cheers!
Ramón.


Jonathan and the semantics:

> I think the bit that is causing others to not understand Wayne's point is
> the use of dfn as an example.  In the case of dfn it is only indicated by
> the user agent as a italics style and not as a definition.  Thus, no one
> really knows that it's a definition but they do know it's visually
> different.  In my opinion, users with disabilities need access to the same
> information -- they need to know it's set apart -- and they need this
> information through HTML markup -- not CSS as CSS is for presentation only
> and not conveying meaning.
> 
> Things like subscripts and superscripts to me are more important because
> their meaning is indicated visually as a superscript or subscript.  Using
> the defense that others on the list have -- that current assistive
> technology doesn't announce them or requires the user to use a certain
> sound scheme is not a good reason to not markup code according to the
> standards.  People need to consider how HTML content may be transformed
> into other alternative formats like Braille.
> 
> The heart of the issue is that when the superscript element is used we are
> pretty sure the intention of the author was to make it a superscript.
> When CSS is used without markup -- a tool doesn't really know the
> intention of the author and thus can't make a valid decision on how to
> represent the information in an alternative format.  People need to
> consider the different ways, formats, and assistive technologies that
> users may be use and the different types of people with disabilities that
> will consume the content.
> 
> After spending so much time in this community I had thought we had already
> addressed the need for people to consume information differently -- but it
> sounds like this is a continual effort that we must do to educate others.
Received on Friday, 21 February 2014 00:08:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:50 UTC