- From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-hwg@idyllmtn.com>
- Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 11:42:00 -0700
- To: love26@gorge.net
- Cc: "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
At 08:23 AM 10/19/1999 , William Loughborough wrote:
>BK:: "I think it's very time-consuming and difficult to follow the
>guidelines and cater for bugs in the browsers :-("
>WL: It is very time-consuming and difficult to learn to write HTML stuff
>in the first place, particularly when you "cater for bugs".
I disagree with both statements. Compared to the rest of the
package of skills needed to be an effective web designer, writing
valid, accessible, cross-platform markup is painfully easy. HTML
tags are perhaps the easiest bit of "programming" [sic] that a
non-programmer could learn, and that's even when you factor in
accounting for accessibility.
HTML, in my opinion, is damned easy. It's just elements and tags
and attributes and <brackets>.
In the web design field, there are many, many other things _much_
harder than HTML. Graphic design, layout skills, navigation and
usability, marketing, java, javascript, and most nearly anything
else related to site creation and management are all much harder
than HTML!
>The
>incremental time added to achieve Guideline Compliance is like all our
>other learning curves, steep but invigorating.
I still disagree; even accessible markup is pretty trivial compared
to site conceptualization or java programming.
>Try to remember that
>accessibility=usability and *ALL* your readers will benefit from Web
>sites that conform to accessibility guidelines.
I agree with the latter; on the former, accessibility is _related_
to usability; I'd say that accessibility equals _usefulness_ instead,
since "usability" has a specific meaning.
--
Kynn Bartlett mailto:kynn@hwg.org
President, HTML Writers Guild http://www.hwg.org/
AWARE Center Director http://aware.hwg.org/
Received on Tuesday, 19 October 1999 15:03:27 UTC