W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > July 2008

Re: "maybe even in the fact that you use words as all," (sic)

From: Philip TAYLOR (Ret'd) <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2008 15:58:22 +0100
Message-ID: <487F5E0E.8060703@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
To: Jonathan Chetwynd <j.chetwynd@btinternet.com>
CC: Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>

Jonathan Chetwynd wrote:

> you don't appear to have considered or responded to my final remark 
> which develops my intention:
>  >> the failure of W3 working groups to engage with this community has 
> ensured the have become even more socially disadvantaged and ostracized.

I did consider it, Jonathan, but as I was unable to
be sure what I should understand from the preceding
text, I did not feel in a position to respond to it.
As I think you will appreciate, I was more seeking
clarification than anything else, but did offer
a personal insight into the deficiencies of icons
as a universal means of communication.

> I wasn't making specific proposal, 
> your assumptions  and suggested assertions are far from the mark.
> There is a huge variety in approach and many varieties of individual needs.
> did you watch the video, or try the examples?
> it seems not, as they use text with a variety of illustrations, some 
> iconic, others symbolic.

I am afraid I found it completely unwatchable : it
is appallingly out of focus, as are the icons on the
main page that you cited :


Enfranchisng and empowering those with learning difficulties
is without doubt a worthwhile aim, but one should not
overlook those with visual disabilities in so doing.  It
is not clear at whom the video and icons are aimed, but
their out-of-focus style of presentation must deter all
but the most determined.

> what is your experience of learning disabilities?
> this term has been applied to a variety of needs.
> the 20% of people in the UK are functionally illiterate, whom I referred 
> to, are unlikely to be at Royal Holloway.
> learning difficulties such as dyslexia are a different community.

Can you give a reference for your assertion of 20% ?
It seems far far too high to me.  You are effectively
using a 1SD cut-off, whereas I would have expected
something closer to 3SD.

> the fact is the relation between text and image is one that needs to be 
> actively developed.
> treating them as separate entities when creating specifications, isn't 
> necessarily helpful.

Strongly agree.

** Phil.
Received on Thursday, 17 July 2008 14:59:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:54:19 UTC