W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2003

Re: Is it acceptable to provide two versions of a site to work around an accessibility problem?

From: Julian Voelcker <asp@tvw.net>
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 14:30:37 GMT
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Message-Id: <VA.000006a6.12e2cf9c@tvw.net>

On Tue, 4 Mar 2003 13:31:16 +0200, Isofarro wrote:
> Does the client know about the cost of fixing the width of the menus? Have
> you established why the client requires the columns to be a fixed width?

It's a design issue, a process that I wasn't involved with.  Personally I 
think it does look a lot better fixed width in the middle of the screen as 
opposed to flexible full width.

> AIUI 'text only' should only be a last resort if other alternatives cannot
> present an accessible website. The purpose of accessibility-minded
> legislation is to re-introduce equality between disbled people and
> non-disabled. There is a general feeling that "equality through separation"
> is no equality at all. I would tend to agree with that.

Fair point.  I notice that the BBC have just revamped some of their sites and 
they have referred to it as 'low bandwidth' for a basic version of their 
site.

> Well, you have tried. I'm curious though, what was the client's reaction
> when he saw the overlap?

I still find that a lot of client's struggle to understand or be willing to 
understand the accessibility issues, most are B2B and don't believe that it 
is an issue.

Unfortunately, I don't think they will sit up and listen until something 
becomes law.

Cheers,

Julian Voelcker
Received on Tuesday, 4 March 2003 09:30:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:08 GMT