- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 22:18:43 +0200
- To: "Jim Ley" <jim@jibbering.com>
- CC: www-svg@w3.org
On Monday, July 28, 2003, 8:09:55 AM, Jim wrote: JL> Hi, JL> I'm trying to make SVG versions of the existing GIF "valid FOO" badges, but JL> I'm having a very hard time making them usefully accessible. JL> http://jibbering.com/2003/7/valid4.01.opt.svg JL> is my current best effort, It seems reasonable. My first test was to select HTML and then continue to select 4.01 which is logically the same text flow, and it worked, so you win in my estimation. JL> (although putting the W3C and the HTML 4.01 in JL> the same text element could be done easily It could, but does it make sense? Is it one continuous text, or two isolated pieces? JL> ) my aims are this: JL> The text in the document says "Valid W3C HTML 4.01" and it can be JL> selected and copied as a complete phrase, and it looks pretty much JL> like the existing badges. Except better; nice drop shadow. JL> I didn't think this should be too hard, JL> however I can't find a way to do it. JL> The problem is that because the tick denoting validity has to come JL> above the text, it has to go and the end of document (standard JL> z-index problem) I can fool simple accessibility agents by using JL> the USE method in the above document, however these simple AT's JL> are pretty useless (if an author uses USE or TREF or similar to JL> repeat content the AT which doesn't understand will get things JL> wrong) I think the root of your problem is conflating the alternative text (Valid W3C HTML 4.01) the displayed text (W3C HTML 4.01) - this is easier to see if you consider the long description, for example (this icon denotes that the HTML content that links to this icon is valid to the SGML DTD defined in the W3C HTML 4.01 specification). So, the tick is not, really, semantically equivalent to the word 'valid'. It could also be argued that making text display as a symbol (or as nothing, which is also possible) is in itself inaccessible. JL> So I'd really need a longer term solution - however even JL> using USE, I can't achieve what I want since I can't have USE a JL> child of TEXT to keep the text grouped in a single text so as to JL> be selectable as a whole. (TREF is no good here, because that JL> doesn't understand ALTGLYPH to take my tick replacement font for JL> the text) JL> Can someone please help me make this simple graphic accessible? JL> (I could add some EARL RDF in a METADATA element, but I know of no JL> way of saying "the document which is displaying this badge is JL> valid HTML 4.01" - but I could say a specific url was, mind you JL> the number of EARL consuming UA's is even fewer than the number of JL> SVG AT's.) I agree that would be valuable, but leave the question of an indirectly specified referent to the RDF folks. JL> Jim. Other, non-accessibility comments: Read the license for Bitstream Vera. You can use the glyphs, but you can't call them Bitstream Vera anymore so please edit the font-family attribute. You do not need to use altglyph to get a W3 ligature. If you put the path of the C on a path child of glyph (or indeed the path of W3) instead of on the glyph element directly, you can give it a color and create a multicolor logo without resorting to altglyph. Its arguable whether this is better or worse in this case; I just wanted to be sure that you (and others reading this) are aware that ligatures, in general, do not need to be wrapped in explicit markup. -- Chris mailto:chris@w3.org
Received on Monday, 28 July 2003 16:18:54 UTC