W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2003

Re: [166] Organize documents so they may be read without style sheets

From: Doyle <doyleb@alaska.net>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 10:34:26 -0800
Message-ID: <000a01c331da$6b5574e0$6601a8c0@madyburnett>
To: "Joe Clark" <joeclark@joeclark.org>, "WAI-GL" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

To The Group -

One factor in relationship to CSS and rendering pages in an accessible
manner has to do with some pages that render well with one operating system
and not another.  Some pages that render okay (accessibility wise) in
Internet Explorer using Windows (various versions or another) do NOT or may
not render on a Macintosh using Internet Explorer and possibly other
browsers.  In this case, it seems important for a user to be able to turn
off CSS and have the page (maybe not render the same) but at least be
accessible on a Mac.

I have come across pages employing CSS and browsed them with various
Macintosh browsers and Mac operating systems.  There have been times when
these pages could actually be read with a Macintosh screen reader
(outSpoken) but the page buttons could not be read by a visual user as the
text on the button was covered-up by the CSS button.  This issue could
easily be solved by developers more adequately testing across platforms and
browsers (something I feel is not being done to the fullest extent

I am not supporting one operating platform over another and I realize
full-well that most  screen reading users are using some form of
Windows-based operating system and likely not Macintosh.  However, it seems
important to point out that there still remains some issues related to CSS
not rendering on some systems with "certain" browsers.  When tested, some
pages on a Mac rendered well using Mozilla, Netscape, Opera and few other
less known browsers but did not render on likely the most popular browser,
Internet Explorer.  Telling people to use a particular browser does not seem
an adequate solution to the issue.

In my opinion, this speaks to some limited issues that have been glitches
for some.  What needs to happen is the educationof web site developers to
the extent that they test their sites against not only mainstream browsers
in Windows but also look at renderings on Macintosh.  And, developers who
produce on Mac's need to cross check their output on Windows and other
operating systems with various browsers.

Just a thought -

Doyle Burnett

Special Education Service Agency

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joe Clark" <joeclark@joeclark.org>
To: "WAI-GL" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 9:23 AM
Subject: RE: [166] Organize documents so they may be read without style

> I don't see a purpose to this guideline in 2003/2004. There just is
> no plausible scenario in which a disabled person would be using a
> browser that cannot render CSS and JavaScript *except* for Lynx or
> the even rarer competing text-only browsers.
> The guideline requires the page to be readable without stylesheets.
> The ramifications of ordering HTML elements so they can be read have
> not been fully understood, either. Maybe Eric Meyer could explain the
> difference between floated and positioned elements and the
> requirements for linear position in source code.
> Even if that were an issue, I contend that the document could still
> be *read* even if components were not in the same order as in CSS
> presentation. Remember, we're assuming valid HTML here. Nobody's
> expecting the same joy of use and ease of understanding with and
> without CSS.
> I don't see what problem this guideline could actually solve here in
> the 21st century. It appears to attempt to restrict authors from
> using CSS and JavaScript, both of which have no inevitable bearing on
> accessibility. It seems to attempt to punish authors for making
> sophisticated Web sites rather than plain-HTML sites. WCAG 2.0 needs
> to encourage the use of CSS, not force authors to use it in one
> guideline ("use CSS for layout") and penalize them in another ("make
> things work fine without CSS"). This guideline embodies one of the
> many contradictions in WCAG 1.0.
> I note that nobody can come up with real-world examples, save for one
> very unusual page. It's just not applicable.
> Hence, this guideline should not be included in WCAG 2.0.
> -- 
>      Joe Clark | joeclark@joeclark.org
>      Accessibility <http://joeclark.org/access/>
>      Weblogs and articles <http://joeclark.org/weblogs/>
>      <http://joeclark.org/writing/> | <http://fawny.org/>
Received on Friday, 13 June 2003 14:46:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:44 UTC