Re: Lynx & what type of document do we want?

Well, to put it another way,

Anne's current mock-up seems to accurately reflect in Lynx the experience of
"reading" (in the broad sense) a Website that is nothing but text to someone
who has disabilities which affect reading text.

The goal is to get some convergence, so the thing makes sense to a text-only
user, to a graphics-only user (I would argue there is no such thing as a
truly graphics only user, but close enough), to someone who falls in between
the two extremes, etc.

And one way to do this is to produce examples from both ends and try to bring
them together. This seems easier than working always from one fixed beginning
point, and seems to better match what we need to be able to describe for the
real world.

cheers

Charles McCN

On Thu, 12 Apr 2001, Jonathan Chetwynd wrote:

  The fact is that the whole WAI site look like  a pile of s**** to someone
  who doesn't read, doesn't have a text reader, and wouldn't bother listening
  to it, if they did.
  Anne's work may not read well in Lynx, its a work in progress and
  demonstrates well enough what can be done. It may need sufficient revision,
  that there is no point in creating a lynx accessible version, though no
  doubt the final published draft will attempt to suit more.


  jonathan chetwynd
  IT teacher (LD)
  j.chetwynd@btinternet.com
  http://www.signbrowser.org.uk


-- 
Charles McCathieNevile    http://www.w3.org/People/Charles  phone: +61 409 134 136
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative     http://www.w3.org/WAI    fax: +1 617 258 5999
Location: 21 Mitchell street FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia
(or W3C INRIA, Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France)

Received on Thursday, 12 April 2001 07:30:29 UTC