- From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-hwg@idyllmtn.com>
- Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 17:25:42 -0700
- To: "ADAM GUASCH-MELENDEZ" <ADAM.GUASCH@EEOC.GOV>
- Cc: robneff@home.com, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org, w3c-wai-eo@w3.org, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
At 07:06 AM 7/16/1999 , ADAM GUASCH-MELENDEZ wrote: >In the case of the example you provided, your page appears to be fully >accessible, but it uses deprecated HTML elements to control the appearance >of the page. Here, CSS would be required. Or, simply strip out the >deprecated elements, and you're fine without CSS. Question: Is the page with CSS instead of the HTML more accessible, less accessible, or equally accessible? Can you explain exactly how the accessibility has been noticeably improved in this case? Note that there may be a choice between "having this look the same in Netscape 3.0 and Netscape 4.0" and "making a very minor increase in accessibility." For some agencies or companies, the tiny benefit is not worth the cost of losing support for Netscape 3.0. -- Kynn Bartlett mailto:kynn@hwg.org President, HTML Writers Guild http://www.hwg.org/ AWARE Center Director http://aware.hwg.org/
Received on Friday, 16 July 1999 20:37:04 UTC