|
womble -> RE: New Technology (3/15/2007 12:37:37)
|
Sounds interesting, and quite useful in theory, but I can't help wondering if it isn't going to be information overload, and like you said, a page with loads of images is going to be far too damned noisy and vibrating....
/tries but fails to keep smutty images from mind [sm=EbilGrin.gif] [;)]
This morning I was investigating various magnification software for work, and amongst them I found one magnifier/reader that had a very annoying system of musical beeps built in to let you know where the mouse was on the screen. It's makers claimed it wasn't noticeable after a while and you quickly got used to figuring out where you were, but even just the short demo of it drove me crazy - I can't remember which it was now, and FF had a bit of a hissy fit this morning and crashed on me, then wouldn't recover the session, so all the tabs I'd got open disappeared. *sigh*
So, back to the vibrating images, and some rhetorical questions...it clicks and vibrates when it finds an image - does it also read the alt text? Click, vibrate, talk - all in the middle of the text the image is in the middle of....Does it also announce it's an image...but that would be redundant with the vibrating bit. Of course there's the embedded/background images thing, and then what's it going to make of the various image replacement techniques out there? Age old problem of diplay: none, and if the image is on the page will it read the alt text and the actual text which is 0.2456 miles off the edge of the screen if you're using one of those image replacement techniques. Of course there's the empty span trick one that nicely keeps both text and image on screen and only displays the text if the image doesn't load, but of course for the standards police you don't get the nice little green tick with that one....
Whole new can of worms and another sort of technology to take into account when designing....Hmmmm - it'll be interesting to see what users make of it.
|
|
|
|
