W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2002

RE: Multiple versions of a web page

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 08:26:46 -0500 (EST)
To: Scott Luebking <phoenixl@sonic.net>
cc: <cyns@microsoft.com>, <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0201010817300.11629-100000@tux.w3.org>
On Mon, 31 Dec 2001, Scott Luebking wrote:


  I agree that there probably won't be a universal solution which
  consists of some combination of multiple versions of a web page
  and some sets of transformations on certain versions of the
  that web page.

  I think it is important to provide web page developers a variety of
  approaches from which they can choose to provide accessibility
  in accordance with the skills and resources they have available.

CMN Well, it sounds like we are thinking on the same page then - this is what
I keep understanding from discussions in the working group.

  Rather than thinking in terms of a generic web page which could be be a
  little misleading, I've been thinking more along the lines of a
  "basic browser" version of web page.  I believe it might be easier for
  web page developers to work with.

CMN Well, the "whatever-we-call-it-that-almost-anyone-can-use" version would
be one that implemented all (or all of a given level of) the relevant
checkpoints of WCAG. There is some push for people to be able to claim
conformance for a page based on the fact that there is an alternative version
which is accessible even if the particular page in question is not. I don't
see anything wrong with that, provided that it is possible to get to the
appropriate version, and the mechanism is clear and "available to everyone".

I think where the discussion comes in is what kinds of techniques are OK for
making things available - if there is a fairly generic version and CC/PP to
autioomatically provide something else is that enough, or do there have to be
markers in the page content itself, or some other set of mechanisms? These
are questions to resolve in working on this, not necessarily something we
should expect to ansewr in the next week or so.

  Providing access to content in a database might be helpful, but I do
  wonder how many users would take advantage of it.  It is not clear to
  me that the percentage of technologically daring people is significantly
  greater in the disabled population than in the general population.

CMN That was just an example, and as I suggested in my interpretation of the
Monash research I alluded to, I think the percentage of people wo will make
use of it would be low. But the benefit to that group of having it accessible
will be very high, just as the percentage of people who cannot see anything
is very low, but the benefit for those people of making things accessible is
very great.


Received on Tuesday, 1 January 2002 08:26:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:40 UTC