Thread Subject: Re: Final? draft of 1194.41a, b, and c (was discussion of who pays for alternate format)
This archival content is maintained by WebAIM and NCDAE on behalf of TEITAC and the U.S. Access Board . Additional details on the updates to section 508 and section 255 can be found at the Access Board web site.
From: Whitney Quesenbery
Date: Mon, Mar 19 2007 3:40 PM
- Return to this mailing list's archives
- View all messages in this thread
- Next message in thread: None
- Previous message in thread: Whitney Quesenbery: "Re: Final? draft of 1194.41a, b, and c (was discussion of who pays for alternate format)"
- Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date
At 06:26 PM 3/19/2007, David Poehlman wrote:
>dp: I don't see how a group of formats could be taken to meet the
>requirements but I supposse that the requirements could be written
>and or enterpreted in that way. I'd actually like to see
>requirements such that we get cross modality in open standards in any
>compliant format but failing that, we could have a provision or set
>of provisions which allow for multiiple formats to meet the
>requirements as a whole.
WQ: Good point, in applications/formats where this is possible. What about:
a diagram in a graphics format and an accompanying textual description.
Whitney Interactive Design
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
"Warning: Objects in the calendar are closer than they appear."
- Next message in Thread: None
- Previous message in Thread: Whitney Quesenbery: "Re: Final? draft of 1194.41a, b, and c (was discussion of who pays for alternate format)"