W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2000

Accessible UI-- text-only or text-accessible?

From: Reidy Brown <rbrown@blackboard.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 16:20:50 -0500
Message-ID: <D31997916B6ED31182190090274E62C1043E4A@GONZAGA>
To: "'EASI-ED3 EASI Online Workshop: Creating Accessible HTML'" <EASI-ED3@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
Cc: "'disacc@onelist.com'" <disacc@onelist.com>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Here's an interesting question... if you are creating an alternate
accessible interface, should it be a text-only interface, or a
text-accessible interface?

Is it better to use accessibility features that come along with some of the
more sophisticated code (e.g. using tables so that you can identify row and
column headers, using images with d-links, using audio with a transcript)?
Or is it better to go with the lowest-common-denominator text-only version--
so you don't have to worry about your table wrapping, for instance?

Keep in mind that this is an "alternate" interface, so for example, if it
did use tables, it wouldn't use parallel tables to format columns... but in
visual browsers the text might wrap, which could cause problems with screen
readers. 

There are essentially two ways to play this-- do the simplest, safest (?)
text version, or go with a slightly more developed version that could
eventually be "spiffed up" with CSS... and (possibly) become the primary UI.

(Please excuse the cross-posting-- you may want to reply just to me, or just
to your listserv rather than hitting reply-to-all in your email software.)

Reidy

_________________________________________
Reidy Brown
Accessibility Coordinator/
Senior Web Application Developer
mailto:rbrown@blackboard.com
http://www.blackboard.com
____________________________________________
Received on Thursday, 6 January 2000 16:30:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:47 GMT