Re: PaceReformedContent3

[Mark Pilgrim <pilgrim@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 8 Oct 2004 14:36:03 -0400, Bob Wyman <bob@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Dare Obasanjo wrote:
> >*sigh* Go read http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-WCAG20-20040730/ 
>         These accessibility guidelines say: "Guideline 1.1 Provide text
> alternatives for all non-text content." However, my personal opinion is that
> these guidelines are terribly flawed and incomplete

That is well outside our charter.  If you are interested in suggesting
improvements to the accessibility guidelines, I suggest you join the
WAI and/or participate in their public mailing list.

> If we had a sincere
> interest in addressing accessibility needs, we would have another guideline
> that said:
> 
>         Guideline 1.x Provide non-text alternatives for all text content.

You mean like http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-CORE-TECHS/#multimedia-equivalents ?

>         The problem is, of course, that text is not the best format for
> addressing the needs of many of the people whose interests are supposedly
> addressed by the accessibility guidelines. 

Please tell me how http://www.idlewords.com/audio/manifesto.mp3 can be
made more accessible to deaf people than
http://www.idlewords.com/audio-manifesto.txt

> Forcing everything to text makes
> sense to those of us who have well working ears, eyes, etc. But, it is less
> than optimal for those who don't.

This makes no sense at all.

-- 
Cheers,
-Mark