- From: Leonard R. Kasday <kasday@acm.org>
- Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 15:25:04 -0400
- To: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>, Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
- Cc: "w3c-wai-gl@w3.org" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, WAI ER group <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>, WAI UA group <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
I would add to Charles's definition of acceptable technological alternative, e.g. a screen magnifier program, that it not cause any other problems. For example, the need for horizontal scrolling that a pure magnifier will require. Len At 01:33 PM 9/26/00 -0400, Charles McCathieNevile wrote: >This is a topic in WCAG at least (but there is a requirement on UAAG implied, >I think). > >I think the thrust of what you are saying is true - that if ther is a readily >achieveable solution, then it isn't a very big problem. The definition of >readily achievable, and solution, is of course where the difficulty lies in >trying to use this as an answer. > >As a first pass, I would suggest that "freely available for MacOS, Unix/Linux >and Windows operating systems, and not having compatibility problems with >Assistive technologies" is as good as anywhere as a departure point on the >search for a usable definition. > >Charles McCN > >On Tue, 26 Sep 2000, Kynn Bartlett wrote: > > At 12:08 PM -0400 9/26/00, Leonard R. Kasday wrote: > >I don't think it satisfies the user requirements for people with > >some degree of low vision, especially if the font size is relatively > >small. > > Devil's advocate position here: > > Doesn't the widespread availability of screen magnifiers (such as the > one built into Windows 2000), plus the availability of screenreaders to > read out the textual content, plus the ability to turn off images and > view the text directly (thus scaling with user font changes), reduce > the need for avoiding textual images? > > If we don't have to worry about providing audio streams -- because > screenreaders exist -- then shouldn't the existence of the various > technologies listed above likewise ease our fears regarding text > buttons? > > We are willing to say "oh, there's technology to deal with -that-" > for a number of items, so where is the line drawn? (If screenreaders > did not exist, the obligation would be on the web designer to > provide an aural output stream for everything, no?) > > --Kynn > > >-- >Charles McCathieNevile mailto:charles@w3.org phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136 >W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI >Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053, Australia >September - November 2000: >W3C INRIA, 2004 Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, >France -- Leonard R. Kasday, Ph.D. Institute on Disabilities/UAP and Dept. of Electrical Engineering at Temple University (215) 204-2247 (voice) (800) 750-7428 (TTY) http://astro.temple.edu/~kasday mailto:kasday@acm.org Chair, W3C Web Accessibility Initiative Evaluation and Repair Tools Group http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/ The WAVE web page accessibility evaluation assistant: http://www.temple.edu/inst_disabilities/piat/wave/
Received on Tuesday, 26 September 2000 15:36:30 UTC