- From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
- Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 10:31:48 -0600
- To: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>, w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
At 09:11 AM 11/24/99 -0500, Ian Jacobs wrote: > >More minor: > - "Braille" or "braille"? What was the consensus the last time this came up? [Is_Editorial IMHO]. > - Issue #13: Is braille accepted as a natural language? Braille is not its own language. Braille is a class of presentation encodings used for a wide variety of natural languages. So, Braille text is (in the context of markup languages) informal, natural language text. What is the document phraseology that was being commented on? > - Is braille also haptic? Technically, there is a way to say yes, but pedagogically, the best answer is "if you are talking about Braille, call it 'tactile' as opposed to 'haptic' because that is a better, more informative and more widely recognized, description. If you are talking about Haptic communication, the tactile sensations employed in Braille may be included without adding "and tactile." But if you are talking about Braille, don't confuse people by calling it 'haptic.' [BTW, this is an example where grabbing Eric's documents, enriching them with named anchors to form link targets, and mounting the result on the UA website as resources for the issues list would be helpful. I don't feel I really understand Eric's comment from the summary here, but I am loathe to take the time to dig it out of the email archive just to find out for a question at this level.] Al
Received on Wednesday, 24 November 1999 10:27:17 UTC