W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2004

RE: NVU, child of Mozilla Composer (Windows & Linux)

From: John Colby <John.Colby@uce.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 04:46:47 +0100
Message-ID: <107DE25EC0216C45AEF670016024245F022A6F0F@exchangea.staff.uce.ac.uk>
To: "Geoff Deering" <gdeering@acslink.net.au>, <sdale@stevendale.com>
Cc: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org on behalf of Geoff Deering 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steven Dale
> Would building on top of Mozilla Composer be worth it?  I mean for
> accessibility?  Would the features that could benefit accessible design
> authoring be easily integrated?   Just a couple quick questions.  I think
> if we as a group get involved, it may help promote acceptance and
> inclusion of the accessible authoring features in proprietary tools.
> -Steve

> Agree

Looking at the NVu situation pragmatically, if a tool is let alone to develop *without* accessibility functions then that tool is going to be limited in its market anyway, so to be in on the ground floor of development would be a definite benefit. I've used it in the pervious version to build a couple of pages (v 0.2), and it has potential, not least in the inclusion of a site mapping function. This iast is the only thing I use any form of Dreamweaver for - so releasing from the necessity of using such a tool would be a definiate benefit.

We here (UCE School of Computing and Information) have finally been able to dump Frontpage - the last people to use it have rewritten their material - so a tool like this has potential.

OK NVu is under development - and needs work, but what doesn't - but if a truly accessible authoring tool were to come from this then it will be well worth it.

(OK, back to bed now - just checking email while the dogs wanted to go out - don't normally work at this time of the morning)



Received on Wednesday, 16 June 2004 23:47:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:28 UTC