W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2002

RE: HTML 4.x or XHTML for accessibility

From: John Foliot - bytown internet <foliot@bytowninternet.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 08:44:03 -0400
To: "Simon White" <simon.white@jkd.co.uk>, "WAI List \(E-mail\)" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <GKEFJJEKDDIMBHJOGLENGEBCCIAA.foliot@bytowninternet.com>

Interesting thread so far, but Simon, if you are looking for a PRACTICAL
reason to use one over the other, try this.

A buddy of mine proudly showed off his new RIM Blackberry... it was very
cool.  One of the neat features was his ability to access web content
wirelessly.  Not sure exactly the whole process, but it grabbed text/html
and converted it on the fly to WML so that the Blackberry could receive.

We did a test, and while HTML 4.01 Trans. was decent, and HTML4.01 Strict
even better, pages authored to XHTML strict were virtually flawless.  Now
the Blackberry is not quite as ubiquitous as the Palm (yet), but it ain't no
sci-fi toy either... there are plenty of them out there all ready.  As a
content owner I would want my information available to the broadest possible
audience (right?), and so, whenever possible, I would look to use XHTML,
only because it does just that.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org]On
> Behalf Of Simon White
> Sent: June 18, 2002 4:00 AM
> To: WAI List (E-mail)
> Subject: HTML 4.x or XHTML for accessibility
> Hello all,
> I have a rather interesting question to pose, and it is one that
> I cannot seem to find a definitive answer for. Can anyone on the
> list provide me with some help with the following question?
> Which is best for accessibility: HTML 4.x or XHTML standards?
> IF anyone knows if there is an answer to this then is it also
> possible to scour everyone's brains for reasons why one is
> preferred above another.
> Thank you in anticipation
> Simon
> ---
> Simon White
> Business Solutions
> Westminster Business Square
> 1-45 Durham Street
> London
> SE11 5JH
> Tel:  020 7793 9399
> Fax: 020 7793 9299
> URL:  www.jkd.co.uk
> ---
> James Kelsey Design Ltd (JKD) or The Incepta Group plc and its
> subsidiary companies may not be held responsible for the content
> of this email as it may reflect the personal view of the sender
> and not that of the company. JKD run anti virus software on all
> servers and all workstations, they can not be held responsible
> for any infected files that you may receive. JKD advises all
> recipients to virus scan any file attachments.
Received on Tuesday, 18 June 2002 08:44:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:19 UTC