Hi shane JS disabled is a reasonable case for providing a no JS copy, but is not an accessibility requirement, nor is the use of lynx. If we wanted to support accessibility lynx, we wouldn't be using ARIA or many of the new HTML features. further thoughts on lynx http://blog.paciellogroup.com/2014/02/doesnt-work-lynx/ -- Regards SteveF HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/> On 14 July 2014 17:09, Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com> wrote: > Well, first, any UA may have JS disabled. But second, text users who rely > on things like lynx as their UA will not be able to properly access the > specifications without a static version. > > > On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com > > wrote: > >> >> On 14 July 2014 16:58, Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com> wrote: >> >>> Actually we have an A11Y requirement for this. >> >> >> I am surprised that this is an accessibility requirement. >> >> -- >> >> Regards >> >> SteveF >> HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/> >> > >
Received on Monday, 14 July 2014 16:16:08 UTC