- From: Al Gilman <Alfred.S.Gilman@IEEE.org>
- Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 10:55:08 -0500
- To: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
- Cc: Vladimir.Bulatov@viewplus.com, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>
Reference WebCGM 2.1 http://www.w3.org/TR/webcgm21/ Reference Hypertext CG ACTION-24 http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/CoordGroup/track/actions/24 Back in September I blurted out two thoughts about WebCGM and accessible graphics, in a cloud of purple smoke. Lofton asked me to spell them out in an email and HCG gave me an action to do that. Better late than never, here they are. Still just brainstorming notions. 1. A question: Would the XML Companion file either accept SVG within it or contain enough information so that with the XML Companion file included, WebCGM files could deliver the same access functionality of the image+SVG diagrams that John Gardner and Vlad Bulatov have worked with? See, for example, http://www.svgopen.org/2004/papers/SVGOpen2004MakingGraphicsAccessible/ 2. A remark: One of the problems with leveraging SVG to get accessible diagrams is that the SVG that actually gets written to most SVG files in the wild is not 'semantic' or 'ontological' but rather just a collection of directives to lay ink on the canvas. A heap of scribbles. No better than a bitmap in terms of still requiring a lot of human effort to build a graph catalog of articulable objects and relationships in the scene. Given that CGM is a native output of CAD systems that maintain something of an ontological view of the subject matter, perhaps the corpus of CGM diagrams in the wild would prove more fertile ore for conversion to accessible form than the corpus of SVG in the wild. Those were the two thoughts. Al
Received on Friday, 7 November 2008 15:55:56 UTC