- From: Anne Pemberton <apembert@crosslink.net>
- Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 19:29:20 -0800
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
William, I think I can frillify your "story" to "The Web will be significantly more accessible to all users if indexing were better" ... and search engines permitted input on choices of various features of pages/sites, such as illustrations, reading level, magnification enabled, sound, text version, plug-ins needed, and whatever else you want to know. Put the right keyword in and it hits the search for that feature. Anne At 01:33 PM 12/22/00 -0800, William Loughborough wrote: >At 01:21 PM 12/22/00 -0800, Kynn Bartlett wrote: >>it does not make it more difficult to use a page if you are lacking >>information on the accessibility (claimed or computed) of the page > >At least we have found the "does too, does not" sticking point in our >disagreement. In my obstinacy/conviction I still (despite your reasoned >discourse) vote for "does too". Remember we are not talking about the page >in isolation, we are talking about the page as "Web Content" - the first >two words in our output effort. We are talking about accessibility to the >Web, not just to its elements. > >The Web will be significantly more accessible (especially/including) for >PWDs if: 1) its contents are properly indexed; 2) the accessibility status >of the contents are determinable *before* access is attempted. > >That's my story and I'm sticking by it. At least so far! > >-- >Love. > ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE > > Anne L. Pemberton http://www.pen.k12.va.us/Pav/Academy1 http://www.erols.com/stevepem/Homeschooling apembert@crosslink.net Enabling Support Foundation http://www.enabling.org
Received on Friday, 22 December 2000 19:33:24 UTC