- From: Belov, Charles <Charles.Belov@sfmta.com>
- Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 10:17:32 -0800
- To: "Daniel Weck" <daniel.weck@gmail.com>
- Cc: <www-style@w3.org>, "fantasai" <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
Daniel Weck [mailto:daniel.weck@gmail.com] wrote on Wednesday, January 19, 2011 8:09 AM > > Oops, I apologize for this editorial mistake: I meant > "display:none", not "visibility:hidden". The former > effectively 'deactivates' an element (so to speak) whereas > the latter is more similar to "voice- volume:0%". In other > words, "visibility:hidden" preserves the visual space that > the element would normally occupy if it was visible > (resulting in an empty or transparent area that still takes > part in the page layout), and conversely "voice-volume:0%" > results in an audio silence lasting as long as the duration > of non-silent TTS playback. > Regards, Daniel Actually, that's an argument in favor of speak:none. It would be inconvenient to make listeners wait for something that is merely hidden to sighted readers. Hope this helps, Charles Belov SFMTA Webmaster > > On 19 Jan 2011, at 14:54, Daniel Weck wrote: > > > Hi Charles, > > personally I see no valid use-case for wanting to "hide" > text in the > > aural dimension, whilst making it visible on the graphical canvas. > > More importantly, I'm pretty sure that this behavior violates > > accessibility good practices. > > > > After having looked at several authoring scenarios, I > remain convinced > > that "speak:none" should be removed from the current > draft, and that > > instead "visibility:hidden" should be used to control element > > "deactivation". I believe the role of the "speak" > > property should be limited to controlling the _style_ in which > > elements get spoken out. > > > > Any other thoughts ? > > Regards, Daniel > > > > On 12 Jan 2011, at 21:43, Belov, Charles wrote: > > > >> fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net wrote on Wednesday, January 12, 2011 > >> 10:53 > >> AM > >>> CSS-ISSUE-153 > >>> > >>> http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Tracker/issues/153 > >>> > >>> The 'speak' property has two functions: one is to dual as > the speech > >>> equivalent of 'visibility', the other is to specify how > to speak the > >>> contents of an element. > >>> > >>> This creates unintentional problems with, e.g. > >>> > >>> acronym { > >>> speak: spell-out; > >>> } > >>> > >>> p.hide { > >>> speak: none; > >>> } > >>> > >>> <p>Thing to hide <acronym>WOAH</acronym> more stuff to hide</p> > >>> > >>> The WOAH is suddenly injected into the speech rendering > due to the > >>> acronym rule, even though that is probably not what's intended. > >>> These functions should be separated into two properties, or the > >>> 'none' value removed entirely. > >>> > >> > >> I do find the wording for none odd: > >> > >> Suppresses aural rendering so that the element requires no time to > >> render. Note, however, that descendants may override this > value and > >> will be spoken. (To be sure to suppress rendering of an > element and > >> its descendants, use the 'display' property > >> > >> What if you only want to suppress the sound and not the display > >> (although I'd want to see a use case that did not violate > >> accessibility standards)? > >> > >> In any case, I believe one could code: > >> > >> acronym { > >> speak: spell-out; > >> } > >> > >> p.hide { > >> speak: none !important; > >> } > >> > >> or perhaps > >> > >> acronym { > >> speak: spell-out; > >> } > >> > >> p.hide, > >> p.hide * { > >> speak: none; > >> } > >> > >> Whether that is sufficient to alleviate concerns is another issue. > >> > >> Hope this helps, > >> Charles Belov > >> SFMTA Webmaster > >> > >> > > > > Daniel Weck > > daniel.weck@gmail.com > > > > > > > > Daniel Weck > daniel.weck@gmail.com > > > >
Received on Friday, 21 January 2011 18:52:33 UTC