W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > October to December 2006

RE: examples of sites with good accessibility

From: Eadie, David <D.Eadie@gcal.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 15:38:19 +0100
Message-ID: <09FFF345110913458F1C9D8850F41D6002C5E329@EXCHANGE.enterprise.gcal.ac.uk>
To: "Jon Ribbens" <jon+w3c-wai-ig@unequivocal.co.uk>, "WAI Interest Group list" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>

Jon,
 
If you read my e-mail properly then you will find that the points you are referring to come from Chris' e-mail. I merely used them as a basis for my final point.
 
I made 3 additional points: the validation failure for the XHTML and CSS, along with the inability to resize the text.
 
My 'final point' reworded, for Jon's benefit, is that whilst here in the UK it has been a legal requirement since 1999 to create an accessible website there appears to be little more than lip service paid to accessibility by a significant number of websites. Some of these websiters continue to receive praise as having made 'a good effort'. What exactly constitutes a good effort today?
 
Dave

________________________________

From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org on behalf of Jon Ribbens
Sent: Mon 23/10/2006 13:29
To: WAI Interest Group list
Subject: Re: examples of sites with good accessibility




"Eadie, David" <D.Eadie@gcal.ac.uk> wrote:
>  1) The alt attributes are often meaningless (e.g. "what to wear now").

That's not meaningless, it's the heading from the text in the image.

>  2) The site uses an image map.

What's wrong with that? It's a client-side image-map and all the links
have alt text.


Email has been scanned for viruses by Altman Technologies' email management service - www.altman.co.uk/emailsystems
Received on Monday, 23 October 2006 14:38:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:13:31 UTC