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

Re: Is this site accessible?

From: Chuck Baslock <cbaslock@kansas.net>
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 17:52:07 -0600
Message-ID: <004401bf7746$89cb95a0$1345abcd@chuck>
To: "Bruce Bailey" <bbailey@clark.net>, "Dine, Brooke" <Brooke.Dine@mail.house.gov>
Cc: "Web Accessibility Initiative" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
This paragraph is in the commarts review


Created with HTML and JavaScript the site is completely accessible and the only real problem
 is that video clips are presented with MS Media Player and it unfortunately doesn't work 
smoothly on every machine-as a matter of fact it's downright quirky. 


----- Original Message ----- 
From: Bruce Bailey <bbailey@clark.net>
To: Dine, Brooke <Brooke.Dine@mail.house.gov>
Cc: Web Accessibility Initiative <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2000 14:38
Subject: RE: Is this site accessible? 


> It's not accessible, not even the home page.
> 
> It spoofs Bobby (not deliberately, Bobby is easily confused by JavaScript).
> I will try to give more details tomorrow.
> The "real" URL (that a text browser gets redirected to) is at:
> http://www.victoriassecret.com/vsc/index.html?ignorecookies
> Paste that URL into Bobby and you will get MUCH different results than the
> "false positive" that comes up by default.
> 
> I don't think Bobby's problems with JavaScript are documented anywhere, but
> it has come up on this list before.
> 
> Where does the CommArt article say that Victoria's Secret is accessible?
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org]On
> > Behalf Of Dine, Brooke
> > Sent: Monday, February 14, 2000 11:36 AM
> > To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> > Subject: Is this site accessible?
> >
> >
> > > Hello All:
> > >
> > > I've come across an interesting article which states that the Victoria's
> > > Secret site is a completely accessible site.  It was picked as
> > the site of
> > > the week by CommArt.com (just for Valentine's Day!) and the article is
> > > located at http://www.commarts.com/interactive/index.html. The site is
> > > located at http://www.victoriassecret.com.
> > >
> > > I looked at the site in IE 5.0 with the graphics turned off and
> > javascript
> > > disabled.  The top of the page lacks alt tags for graphics,
> > etc. and it is
> > > only when you scroll to the middle of the page that your see the "text
> > > only" link.  This links to the  bottom of the page where all of the
> > > categories are listed in a site map style layout.  However, when you
> > > select the links from this page, you are directed back into the graphic
> > > pages with haphazard "alt" tags, etc.   And the descriptions
> > for the items
> > > seem to lack essential information for someone who is visually
> > impaired to
> > > truly understand what they are trying to purchase.  Once you
> > click to the
> > > item's page, there is a decent description of the item, but the color,
> > > size and quantity are presented in three separate drop down boxes.
> > >
> > > I checked the URL against Bobby and it passed with the exception of one
> > > instance where there was no provision of alternative content for each
> > > SCRIPT that conveys important information or function, and they
> > needed to
> > > ensure that descriptions of dynamic content are updated with changes in
> > > content.
> > >
> > > I would argue that they've attempted to make their site somewhat
> > > accessible, but they have not been completely thorough in providing alt
> > > tags, etc. (This is just my opinion.) I'm working very hard to
> > understand
> > > how to make a site compliant, so, I'm always looking for
> > examples of sites
> > > which are designed with accessibility in mind.
> > >
> > Any opinions on this site would be appreciated, and should be
> > interesting considering the subject matter!
> >
> > > Thanks for your input.
> > >
> > Regards.
> > Brooke Dine
> > Sr. Web Developer
> > Office of the Clerk
> > U.S. House of Representatives
> > Washington, DC  20515
> > 202.226.4943
> >
> 
Received on Monday, 14 February 2000 18:48:52 GMT

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