- From: Nir Dagan <nir@nirdagan.com>
- Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2000 19:01:41 -0500
- To: Scott Luebking <phoenixl@netcom.com>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
At 02:45 PM 1/22/00 -0800, Scott Luebking wrote: >I'm sorry to say, but your suggestion of extending XHTML for webbish >constructs is rather simplistic. Yes of course. But I would like to recall that there was a big discussion at some point of how to mark navigation bars exactly for the purpose of allowing moving them around by the user agent. Simplicity is a virtue, not a drawback. If one wants that a wide public of content providers will create accessible websites, one should create simple rules, from the content provider's point of view, for acheiving it. Returning different documents based on the request variables has its virtues, but is very demanding from the content provider. Only very large websites that hire professional programmers can afford that. Eventually every kid and every housewife will have a website, and we want all of these websites to be accessible. > >I don't quite understand your comment on it being preferable that WAI >not create guidelines for using given specifications. It would seem that >the guidelines/techniques do just that, e.g. recommending use of the LABEL >tag, not using TABLE for layout, etc. I think that the Content guidelines should stick to principles or axioms of accessible design. And that there should be a set of techniques that gives the "how to do" stuff. These techniques may very well include XSLT stuff. By their nature the techniques are evolving over time while the axioms stay fixed. This is very much how the guidelines are organized now. This is also very good for WAI's work directly. It can evaluate other W3C proposals against the "WAI axioms". I didn't say WAI shouldn't give these techniques. I said that it shouldn't be the major and only effort of WAI. The main effort should be in getting the other W3C recommendations to take into account accessiblity in the first place. When WAI started alt was not a required attribute in <img> in HTML (then HTML3.2), so it was quite urgent to state that HTML pages without alt in <img> are not accessible. Now by having a better HTML recommendation (HTML4.0), we achieve much more on the alt front than a hundred techniques documents, simply because there are hundereds of more people who validate their HTML pages without reading WAI documentation at all. Excuse me again for the rather simplistic example. It disregards the fact that writing the alt text well is also very important; but I hope it is illustrative still. I think we are standing in a begining of a period where lots of proposals of XML applications/modules will be in the air. WAI should be alert to influence those in time. Regards, Nir. =================================== Nir Dagan Assistant Professor of Economics Brown University Providence, RI USA http://www.nirdagan.com mailto:nir@nirdagan.com tel:+1-401-863-2145
Received on Saturday, 22 January 2000 18:59:03 UTC