- From: Wendy A Chisholm <wendy@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 14:06:35 -0500
- To: w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org
I took an action during today's telecon to summarize our discussion of WCAG 11.4 so that we could continue it on the list. The minutes are available at [1]. WCAG checkpoint 11.4 reads: <BLOCKQUOTE> 11.4 If, after best efforts, you cannot create an accessible page, provide a link to an alternative page that uses W3C technologies, is accessible, has equivalent information (or functionality), and is updated as often as the inaccessible (original) page. [Priority 1] Techniques for checkpoint 11.4 Note. Content developers should only resort to alternative pages when other solutions fail because alternative pages are generally updated less often than "primary" pages. An out-of-date page may be as frustrating as one that is inaccessible since, in both cases, the information presented on the original page is unavailable. Automatically generating alternative pages may lead to more frequent updates, but content developers must still be careful to ensure that generated pages always make sense, and that users are able to navigate a site by following links on primary pages, alternative pages, or both. Before resorting to an alternative page, reconsider the design of the original page; making it accessible is likely to improve it for all users. </BLOCKQUOTE> "accessible page" is defined as: <BLOCKQUOTE> Content is accessible when it may be used by someone with a disability. </BLOCKQUOTE> There were a number of issues: 1. When does a person receive a message about providing an alternative page? Is it only after they have not satisfied all P1 checkpoints, or all P1 and P2? OR, do people start out by saying, "I want to reach X level of conformance" and if they do not meet all of the checkpoints associated with that level then they are given the alternative page option as a suggestion? 2. What are some automatic checks that we can perform to determine if a page as been identified as an alternative page is up to date? if it is truly an equivalent alternative page? One suggestion is to check that all of the links on the inaccessible page available on the alternative page. Others? 3. What action do we take if we identify/verify that an alternative page exists? Do we suggest that they eliminate it since we prefer they try to make a single accessible page? Do we analyze it to make sure it is equivalent? Some feel it is a red flag indicating a "cop-out" in some sense. Depending on the situation, an alternative page (or set of alternative pages) is reasonable. The unfortunate example is when a designer has created a whole site with Flash. The only alternative that we are aware of is a set of alternative pages. 4. We also discussed using nested OBJECT elements (with text content as the inner-most nest) depending on what type of object was being included. thoughts? --wendy [1] http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/minutes/20000124.html -- wendy a chisholm world wide web consortium web accessibility initiative madison, wi usa tel: +1 608 663 6346 /--
Received on Monday, 24 January 2000 14:05:01 UTC