W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2000

Re: A proposal for changing the guidelines

From: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 10:26:34 +1100 (EST)
To: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.4.10.10003111010020.24487-100000@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
As has been discussed before on this list, the guidelines already provide
for "alternative versions" of documents as a last resort, where other
access measures can not be implemented. This is an entirely reasonable
approach. Moreover, the guidelines specify the requirements which need to
met by any web content in order for it to be regarded as accessible, at
three distinct levels. These requirements, it is clear, can be satisfied
either by supplying a single version of a document or, where this is not
possible, by multiple versions. To this extent, the requirements are
goal-oriented rather than process-oriented: they prescribe what must be
available to user agents, namely accessible web content, and are not
concerned with how this is generated, whether by server-side manipulations
or otherwise.

Thus I do not support changing the guidelines in such a way as to accord
priority to "alternative pages", as these are already permitted, in an
appropriate context, specifically as a fall-back position, by the
guidelines as they stand. The most that should be said regarding
"alternative pages" is to offer relevant suggestions in the HTML
techniques module under checkpoint 11.4.
Received on Friday, 10 March 2000 18:26:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:01 GMT