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

RE: "invisible" alternate links: accessible?

From: Fox, Jamie <Jamie.Fox@USMint.Treas.Gov>
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 14:40:51 -0400
Message-ID: <9B2C020EAA53D411A7FA00D0B74D6AA501FBE5@wdc9200.usmint.treas.gov>
To: "'Zachary Mutrux'" <zacm@etr.org>
Cc: WAI <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Why would you want to?  If people with text readers need it why wouldn't
na´ve sighted users need it?


=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
Jamie Fox
Senior QA Test Engineer
(202) 513-5080

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Zachary Mutrux [mailto:zacm@etr.org] 
Sent:	Tuesday, August 08, 2000 1:59 PM
To:	WAI
Subject:	"invisible" alternate links: accessible?

Ahoy the WAI IG:

What do you think about making certain text the same color as the page
background, if it is intended for users of text-only browsers? I have done
this with alternate text navigation links, which appear at the bottom of
each page in a site I'm working on. My reasoning is that they pose an
unnecessary visual distraction for sighted users, but their color poses no
barrier to users with impaired vision.

I'd be interested to hear what others think of this practice.

zm

--
Zachary Mutrux, IT Generalist, National Service Resource Center
800-860-2684 x.130  |  http://www.etr.org/nsrc
831-461-0205 (TDD)  |  AOL Instant Messenger screen name: NSRC TA
Received on Tuesday, 8 August 2000 14:38:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:49 GMT