- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 9 May 2000 13:05:53 -0400 (EDT)
- To: WAI AU Guidelines <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
--
Charles McCathieNevile mailto:charles@w3.org phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI
Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053
Postal: GPO Box 2476V, Melbourne 3001, Australia
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 5 May 2000 09:04:47 -0700
From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
To: Kathleen Anderson <kathleen.anderson@po.state.ct.us>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org,
Michael W Baker <Michael.W.Baker@grc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: Legal Guidelines
Resent-Date: Fri, 5 May 2000 12:13:41 -0400 (EDT)
Resent-From: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
At 11:58 AM -0400 5/05/2000, Kathleen Anderson wrote:
>Hi Michael:
>The answer to your third question is 'yes', FrontPage does produce
>pages that are not compliant with accessibility guidelines.
>Two examples:
>it does not include DOCTYPE at the beginning of your pages, and it
>does not add alt text (or even 'suggest' that you should) when you
>place an image on your page.
The first example would be a priority 2 violation under WCAG, and
lack of ALT text is a priority 1 under WCAG. However, we should
probably judge FrontPage by the Authoring Tool Accessibility
Guidelines...and I can't remember if anyone's done a review of
FP yet.
--
--
Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com>
http://www.kynn.com/
Received on Tuesday, 9 May 2000 13:05:54 UTC