W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 1998

Re: Development WAI activities

From: Al Gilman <asgilman@access.digex.net>
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 1998 18:24:21 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199803022324.SAA25555@access2.digex.net>
To: dagan@upf.es (nir dagan)
Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
to follow up on what nir dagan said:

> Frames are visual by nature, and any linear support will not
> replace the necessity for a no-frames version. Again, its up to
> the authors to provide the real solution.


I find this too pessimistic to accept as the long-term answer.
Frames are simply too "right" an idea to relegate them to the
problem list forever.  Framesets are intrinsically contextual in
nature.  They capture the layers of the onion the way the largely
ignored <LINK REL=foo > structure tried to.  The problem is that
the relationships are not adequately articulated; too much is
left to be implicit in the visual juxtaposition.

Any problem we have with framesets today we are going to have in
spades with multipanel multimedia presentations.

Can anyone help me find some good [or as good as they get]
examples of framed sites that are feasible, easy, or even
gracious to navigate in [your choice of] adaptive environment?
Start at www.microsoft.com and at www.cybermedia.com and tell me
about a site that is better.

Al Gilman
Received on Monday, 2 March 1998 18:20:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:00 UTC