W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2005

RE: frames and no frames content

From: Bailey, Bruce <Bruce.Bailey@ed.gov>
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 14:08:41 -0400
Message-ID: <CCDBDCBFA650F74AA88830D4BACDBAB50B2D4636@wdcrobe2m02.ed.gov>
To: "drs18" <drs18@psu.edu>, "Antony Tennant" <antonytennant@yahoo.co.uk>
Cc: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>

>> What WCAG1 AAA standard forbids requiring a frame capable browser?

As Phil points out, my question was off topic.

>> I like how Lynx handles frames. 
>> I find the exposed messages about "this site requires a frame
>> capable browser" to be quite ironic.
>> Why not just list the purpose of the different of frames and the
>> URLs to them in the NOFRAMES content area and be done with it?

> Seems clear enough. "Sorry, you need frames" isn't an equivalent.

I don't believe I suggested that.

The WAI techniques regarding frames and Checkpoint 1.1 hardly implies that the provision of complete alternative site version is necessary.  I don't understand why commenters on this IG list are recommending such an approach as anything other than their own personal preference.

10.3 Writing for browsers that do not support FRAME
http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-HTML-TECHS/#noframes

The above sample links to another html page, but that is primarily for brevity of the example.  The whole text-only contents could just as easily be there.
Received on Wednesday, 18 May 2005 18:15:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:21 GMT