- From: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
- Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 14:22:22 +1100 (EST)
- To: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
This thread was discussed at today's meeting. Details can be found in the minutes, to which Wendy has posted a reference. Those present at the teleconference were in broad agreement that: 1. The use of "alternative pages" as supplied by a web server, is permitted in the existing guidelines as a "last resort" option (checkpoint 11.4). Appropriate technical advice may therefore be given in the Techniques document. 2. Any acceptance of the proposition that "alternative versions" of web content should be deployed as the principal means of satisfying diverse user needs, would entail substantial revision of the guidelines and a radical departure from the principles of universal design which lie at their foundation. More specifically, control over presentation, instead of residing in the hands of the user, would be transferred to the author and the server administrator. Instead of supplying semantically and structurally rich markup to the client software, the server would provide presentationally-oriented markup, constituting one of several alternative presentations defined by the content developer. 3. Participants in the teleconference were unanimously of the view that, while recognising the need to provide alternative versions of content in order to accommodate the limitations of certain user agents, for example those in mobile devices, client-side style sheets, combined with appropriate XML/HTML/XHTML markup to convey significant semantic and structural distinctions, offer a more flexible and general solution than would recourse to server-supplied presentational formats in meeting the needs of diverse user populations. 4. If the present discussion of server-generated content is to proceed further, then it must be formulated as a specific proposal to change the guidelines and/or techniques document, rather than as a general thesis concerning web accessibility. Though acknowledging the general value of the discussion so far, working group members considered that a concrete proposal would need to be offered if the issue were to be pursued farther in the context of this group and its deliverables.
Received on Thursday, 13 January 2000 22:23:32 UTC