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

Re: Multiple versions of a web page

From: David Poehlman <poehlman1@home.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 15:03:45 -0500
Message-ID: <001201c18cb6$18a3a980$c2f20141@mtgmry1.md.home.com>
To: "Scott Luebking" <phoenixl@sonic.net>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>, "Kynn Bartlett" <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
It could be nice looking but it is still a non elegant solution
according to the deffinition.  This is one of those situations in which
a truly elligant solution would be to serve it only where it is needed
if we only had the intellegence to know how to do that through
identification of the end user.  one way of course would be to ask.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kynn Bartlett" <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
To: "David Poehlman" <poehlman1@home.com>; "Scott Luebking"
<phoenixl@sonic.net>; <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Monday, December 24, 2001 2:39 PM
Subject: Re: Multiple versions of a web page


At 7:13 AM -0500 12/24/01, David Poehlman wrote:
>please explain what is more or less elligant?

An "elegant" solution is one which cleanly and tidily solves the
problems and requires no particular "nasty hacks or kludges" to get
around.  For most programmers or software developers, a nice elegant
solution is much preferable to a quick and dirty fix.  Elegant
solutions tend to be closer to the standard in both a literal meaning
and in intent, but may be less effective in practice.

For example, consider the case of "D-links".  D-links are _not_ an
elegant solution.  They put up a dirty little blue "d" on the screen
and they're not clear how they work or why, if you don't know what they
are.  But they _do_ provide access to the longer description of the
graphical object.

The LONGDESC attribute, on the other hand, is closer to the idea
of an "elegant" solution, as it uses an established mechanism within
HTML -- linking via an attribute -- to identify the longer
description.  However, it fails in practice, since it's not widely
supported by browsers.  (Is it supported by any mainstream
browsers these days?)

An even more elegant solution would be probably be something using
XLink and the content of the <img> element, to provide a fallback
that is going to be accessible even to older browsers -- you can
do this with <object> for example.  (The fallback via content
part, not the XLink part.)

--Kynn

--
Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com>                 http://kynn.com
Chief Technologist, Idyll Mountain            http://idyllmtn.com
Web Accessibility Expert-for-hire          http://kynn.com/resume
January Web Accessibility eCourse           http://kynn.com/+d201
Received on Monday, 24 December 2001 15:03:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:59 GMT