Sent by Jukka K. Korpela on 3 November 2003 12:12
On Mon, 3 Nov 2003, Laurence Robb wrote:
> Here is a very noisy sample, who and where are Paul, Harry and Betty?
Anyone and his brother and sister, in the land of Oz. :-)
> Is my site going to talk if I stick this in?
No. What you have copied seems to be part of the recommended browser's
default style sheet in the CSS 2 specification. That part is almost
completely unsupported, and the aural features have been removed from the
CSS 2.1 draft. Consider them virtually nonexistent. They might try a
resurrection in CSS 3, but probably as a rather different design.
Besides, _if_ a browsers supports those parts of CSS 2, it is rational to
expect that it either uses the default style sheet (so it would not change
things if you set them in your author style sheet) or has good reasons not
to do so (in which case your author style sheet could be harmful).
> It would be ideal for accessibility
What make you think so? Do you think that setting fonts and colors (some
of the visual counterpart of the aural features) would make your page more
accessible?
It seems that aural style sheets would be useful basically for fine-tuning
the audio presentation as experienced by "normal" people who use aural
browsing for a change, or for comfort, e.g. in order to make a browser
read a novel for you. Daily aural browsing by blind people tends to be
different, and needs to be fast, with little possibilities for useful
tuning.
--
Jukka "Yucca" Korpela, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
______________________________________________________________________
css-discuss [EMAIL-REMOVED]]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/