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

Re: compatibility

From: David Poehlman <poehlman1@comcast.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 19:07:35 -0400
To: John Foliot - bytown internet <foliot@bytowninternet.com>, Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>
Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Message-id: <003e01c22d1d$931ce0c0$19e03244@DAVIDPOEHLMAN>

why might it not be inaccessible?

Because the browser that you are wanting people to upgrade from or too
may be at issue.  It might just happen that for a particular
circumstance, the environment one has is the most accessible one they
can have.  I take you back a coupld of years ago to what happened when
ie 4.0 came out.  they did not include the msaa fixes that would have
made it work better with screen readers and in fact, it was worse than
its predecessor till a patch for it was released in 4.01.  I will also
ask that you look at ns4.77 vs ns 6 for screen readers.  we cannot go
thre.  If I have to use netscape for one reason or another, the best I
can do accessibly is 4.77.


----- Original Message -----
From: "John Foliot - bytown internet" <foliot@bytowninternet.com>
To: "Jim Ley" <jim@jibbering.com>
Cc: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 5:16 PM
Subject: RE: compatibility




> You do realise CSS is optional, and a fully conformant browser will
also
> render your "get a conformant browser" warning.
>

yes, which is why I stated *may*

If a user chooses to employ a browser which either does not support
current
standards, or if they choose not to use the additional advantages that
standards (such as CSS) delivers, that is their privilege and right; my
adding a small note at the bottom of the page suggesting that they may
be
due for an up-grade will probably be ignored as quickly and as surely as
the
copyright notice.  These users are already fully aware of the status of
their browser - it's strengths and weaknesses and probably also are
aware of
why they have chosen to use such an application.  My use of CSS and
Standards will none-the-less ensure that the content (the real reason
they
have come to the site) is still accessible, because I have seperated
style
from substance.

But in the great big world, there are many, many, many users, not just
in
the disabled community (in fact probably NOT in the disabled community)
who
none-the-less use the internet and the web daily, often with the
software
"given" to them.  They generally are not aware that there are issues
such as
"accessibility" and "standards compliance" (only that sometimes web
sites
can be "bad" or "useless").  I humbly suggested to try and do something
to
educate them and perhaps improve their user experience by using a method
which will appear ONLY when a browser which does not support a three
year
old Standard is used (CSS2), and for that I am told I am rude, nagging
and
ignorant.

OK, I am all of that and more.  But I see no further need to continue
this
thread - as I have said earlier, everyone is entitled to their opinion.
And
despite asking 3 times now, nobody has given me a concrete reason why
this
might be considered inaccessible.

JF
Received on Tuesday, 16 July 2002 19:08:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:05 GMT