- From: Dick Brown <dickb@microsoft.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2000 17:19:34 -0800
- To: "'Scott Luebking'" <phoenixl@netcom.com>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org, "'w3c-wai-ig@w3.org'" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Scott, I don't understand why you say: "... the use of text-only versions means that the NY Times is out of compliance with the guidelines." I can't find any checkpoint in the content guidelines that prohibits text-only sites. The pertinent checkpoint seems to be 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." Would you please elaborate? Thanks, Dick Brown Program Manager, Web Accessibility Microsoft Corp. www.microsoft.com/enable -----Original Message----- From: Scott Luebking [mailto:phoenixl@netcom.com] Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2000 11:09 AM To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org Subject: Re: New York Times web site Hi, Gregory Your response is kind of unexpected. First, the use of text-only versions means that the NY Times is out of compliance with the guidelines. Another interesting aspect is that your comment supports what I've been saying about the usefulness of multiple versions of dynamically generated web pages. It also points out that the guidelines may need to have different requirements depending on whether the web pages are created dynamically or not. Scott > aloha, scott! > > please let them know that the text-only slash low bandwidth version of > their site makes them the most accessible online newspaper that i've yet to > encounter.... > > overall, their web site (with a few significant holes, such as the magazine > section) is easy to use, and is quite a popular source of news for blind > users, especially those who use lynx... > > gregory.
Received on Thursday, 10 February 2000 20:21:02 UTC