W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 1999

Re: A different approach for web page accessibility

From: Kristine Bradow <kbradow@ece.eng.wayne.edu>
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1999 13:04:09 -0500
Message-Id: <36FE6F18.8486B278@ece.eng.wayne.edu>
To: Scott Luebking <phoenixl@netcom.com>
Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org, Bob Erlandson <rerlands@ece.eng.wayne.edu>
With regard to DHTML,

I've been doing some work with Microsoft InterDev recently to build a web front end for
a database. According to MS documentation, I was under the impression that DHTML is
only IE-friendly. That's why I didn't use it--*.asp seemed to be the only alternative.
I viewed your page successfully in Netscape 4.05, but I'm curious as to how
cross-browser friendly DHTML is. Is DHTML more accessible than asp?

Kristine Bradow
Wayne State University
Detroit, MI 48202
(313) 577-1791

Scott Luebking wrote:

> Hi,
> A complaint that I've heard from various blind web page users is that
> they often have to read through all sorts of navigation links before
> they can get to the "meat" of the page.  This means that they can
> be less efficient than their sighted counter-parts.  (Since
> I'm of the school of thought that accessibility must include
> efficiency, I believe that this is an important aspect to consider
> for web page accessibility.)
> Dynamic HTML is becoming more popular for web pages.  I figured it might be
> interesting to use dynamic HTML to improve the efficiency of blind
> people navigating through a web page.  By incorporating features
> of dynamic HTML, I re-wrote one of BART's web pages so that the navigation
> bars are invisible.  This means that there are much fewer links to read through.
> Two links are provided to show the navigation bar.  One shows a graphic
> version while the other shows a text-only version.  If you would like
> to take a look at this version of the web page, the URL is:
>   http://members.aol.com/criptrip/alt_bart_page.html
> There are some interesting benefits to the approach.  The page becomes much simpler
> to read for blind people and people with certain types of learning
> disabilities.  More screen real estate is freed up.  The pages are easier
> to write since less effort is needed to find visually pleasing ways
> to include links.  The pages can look less clutered.
> There might be some problems to this approach.  Some screenreaders
> are not up to handling dynamic HTML.  Some non-disabled may not want
> to do an extra mouse click to see the navigation bar.  Lynx users may have
> a problem with dynamic HTML.
> Let me know what you think.
> Scott
Received on Sunday, 28 March 1999 12:54:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:03 UTC