W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > July to September 2001


From: by way of Al Gilman <jo@bendingline.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:14:35 -0400
Message-Id: <200108171656.MAA5751234@smtp2.mail.iamworld.net>
To: w3c-wai-eo@w3.org
Cc: Jo Miller <jo@bendingline.com>
[Jo has provided an excellent summary, here.  This is both an entry and
archtype for our collection of bona_fide FAQs.  To go with the recent null-ALT
thread, etc. The only quibble I would have is that the reference [where the
shows in the surface text of the answer] should follow the short answer, not
precede it. One can debate about whether links inline in the answer text are a
good or bad idea.  -Al]

At 10:35 +0200 8/17/01, Russell.coates@centrica.co.uk wrote:
>1.Can you please explain how this checkpoint relates to 'Frames' as I'm a
>little unclear as to what the text equivalent should actually be, is it a
>frame 'title' or should you provide a completely different non-frames page
>with the same content?


The Techniques for Web Content Accessibility page addresses the 
subject of frames in more detail and provides code examples. See
10-HTML-TECHS/#noframes , which says, "links 
to descriptions of a frame should be provided along with other 
alternative content in the NOFRAMES element of a FRAMESET."

What you will need to put between your NOFRAMES tags to ensure access 
for people whose user agents don't display frames will depend on the 
content of your site. A set of navigational links that duplicates 
your top (or side) navigation menu may suffice.

(And as you mention, frames and framesets must also be given 
meaningful titles.)
Jo Miller
Received on Friday, 17 August 2001 12:56:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:55:48 UTC