W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > October to December 2001

[w3c-wai-ig] <none>

From: Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2001 09:37:57 -0400
Message-ID: <01a601c14f34$7c625f80$ca969dc3@emedia.co.uk>
To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
4@[10.0.1.2]>
Subject: Re: Navigation to Alternate HTML for Screen Readers
Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2001 13:32:18 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200

> At 6:09 PM -0400 2001/10/06, David Poehlman wrote:
>
> It's not always desirable to make the user interface for a non-
> visual user a derivative of the user interface for a visual user,
> in the same way that it's not desirable to base the "user interface"
> for a movie on that of a book.

HTML, has no presentational information, it has structural information, I
think if you're going to make these claims that different groups require
different structural representations, then you need to start backing it
up with examples, in my mind content has a structure, and it is only the
representation of that structure which need change.

The user interface for the non-visual user cannot be a derivative of the
visual user, as HTML4.01 has no visual representation, therefore it is
only a derivative of the HTML4.01 representation.

> Unfortunately, we live in a world in which people with disabilities
> are repeatedly told they must "settle" -- and so we get very good
> people who I like, such as David Poehlman, not realizing that there's
> anything more available to him.  There is more to the world, Dave,
> than just one-size-fits-all web sites -- there's a whole new set
> of opportunities I want to show you and everyone else where usability
> is not just a perk for the sighted.

Examples, Techniques etc.  The other problem I have, is that most
developers, do not have the background, experience, or knowledge to
create a tailored version for screenreaders (for example.)  and to
advocate the technique in the guidelines would require a huge amount of
techniques and examples.  I've yet to see any provided, let alone enough
to explain to a developer without the disibility, and without the ability
or access to anyone to evaluate usability of such a version, to encourage
them by placing them in the guidelines would cause more damage to the
idea of accessibility for all, than benefit it would cause.

Jim.
Received on Sunday, 7 October 2001 09:37:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:58 GMT