W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > July to September 2004

Re: Javascript alternatives not necessary?

From: Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG) <rscano@iwa-italy.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 07:57:00 +0200
To: <lguarino@adobe.com>, <leeroberts@roserockdesign.com>
Cc: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-Id: <200407210154656.SM08812@Inbox>

Can we said, as do in ATAG wg, to follow ISO 16701 when they develop web content interfaces?
Shall we involve WAI to create a group for independent ACCESSIBILITY API guidelines.
As AC Rep I would happy to propose it

----- Messaggio originale -----
    Da: "Loretta Guarino Reid"<lguarino@adobe.com>
    Inviato: 21/07/04 0.40.06
    A: "Lee Roberts"<leeroberts@roserockdesign.com>
    Cc: "w3c-wai-gl@w3.org"<w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
    Oggetto: Re: Javascript alternatives not necessary? 
    
    
    
    Lee, what should we be telling the developers of these new technologies that 
    they need to do before their techology doesn't need a text alternative for 
    accessibility? Or will it always be the case that they need a text alternative?
     
    
    > While we focus upon things like JavaScript, SVG and Flash,
    > who says that some smart person won't come up with a new
    > technology?  Each time we have a new technology come up we
    > are in the same position ... it won't work on all
    > platforms and in all assistive technology. Therefore, we
    > must have a fallback position.
    > 
    > That fallback position must be an equivalent text
    > alternative.
    > 
    > Lee Roberts
    > http://www.roserockdesign.com
    > http://www.applepiecart.com
    
    
    

[Messaggio troncato. Toccare Modifica->Segna per il download per recuperare la restante parte.]
Received on Wednesday, 21 July 2004 01:57:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:17:58 UTC