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

RE: Status of RTF format?

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 11:44:39 -0400 (EDT)
To: Bruce Bailey <bbailey@clark.net>
cc: Greg Gay <g.gay@utoronto.ca>, love26@gorge.net, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.20.0007201143300.7512-100000@tux.w3.org>
Hmmm. A minor quibble - RTF was the format I was using when I learned about
style sheets, and used what is a pretty simple User Intereface for producing
and editing them (although they still end up in a propreitary format - a nice
feature of CSS is that if I really get stuck I can manually read and adjust
the code, although the goal is not to have to...)

Charles McCN

On Thu, 20 Jul 2000, Bruce Bailey wrote:

  > My question is, if a developer includes RTF copies of word processed
  > documents on a web site, are they obliged to include an html version in
  > order to satisfy guideline 11.1?
  
  Yes, absolutely.  RTF is only modestly more accessible than PDF (or Word or
  WordPerfect for that matter).  Sure, its a shared non-proprietary format,
  but there are no public specifications for "validity", let alone
  "accessible".  Besides, all of those formats are presentation oriented -- as
  opposed to HTML which was MEANT to share information (and is being ABUSED
  when used for GUI formatting effects).
  

--
Charles McCathieNevile    mailto:charles@w3.org    phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative                      http://www.w3.org/WAI
Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053
Postal: GPO Box 2476V, Melbourne 3001,  Australia 
Received on Thursday, 20 July 2000 11:46:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:05 GMT