RE: Multiple versions of a web page

Hi,

I tend to believe that "universal" will not be accomplished because there
will always be some individuals where their needs are so complex
and conflicting that they won't be able to be addressed given
resource limitations.

I think I would give less priority to a semantically rich version
because it doesn't seem that the number of people in the general
disabled community who get into transformations would justify th
expenditure of resource.

Scott

> Scott Luebking writes:
>  > Hi,
>  > 
>  > I agree that there probably won't be a universal solution which
>  > consists of some combination of multiple versions of a web page
>  > and some sets of transformations on certain versions of the
>  > that web page.
> 
> Of course the ultimate extrapolation of the "multiple versions"
> phenomenon consists in "final-form" languages where the server
> generates a highly presentational format based on user/user-agent
> preferences. If you are arguing that there is no number (n) of final
> forms that can be delivered by such a process that would satisfy the
> need for accessibility then this would suggest the principle that any
> "final-form" versions must be accompanied by at least one alternative,
> semantically rich version, made available for processing further
> downstream (by the user agent, a proxy or other applicable software).
> 
> If this conclusion is correct (and I don't have time to argue the
> point this evening), then it should presumably be incorporated into
> the conformance scheme (i.e., it is permissible to provide multiple,
> including final-form versions and these may indeed enhance
> accessibility, but at least one semantically rich version should
> nonetheless be available satisfying checkpoints 1.3 & 1.5).

Received on Tuesday, 1 January 2002 11:51:48 UTC