- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charlesn@sunrise.srl.rmit.edu.au>
- Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 12:54:01 +1000 (EST)
- To: Liam Quinn <liam@htmlhelp.com>
- cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Liam is right here about the point of NOSCRIPT. But the problem is the same as the one with IMG only having ALT attributes - there are several purposes that ought to be served. There are additional problems raised by the fact that scripts can occur in all sorts of places... Charles On Mon, 4 May 1998, Liam Quinn wrote: > At 12:28 PM 05/05/98 +1000, Charles McCathieNevile wrote: > >The point of a NOSCRIPT is to decribe a script. > > LQ:: No, the point of NOSCRIPT is to replace a script, providing alternate > content when client-side scripting is disabled or the scripting language is > not supported (though popular browsers don't support NOSCRIPT with > unsupported scripting languages). > > There is a key difference between replacing a script or object and > describing it. We need to recognize this difference and make sure that we > have adequate methods of providing replacements and descriptions where > needed (hence my earlier message about OBJECT and LONGDESC). Mixing > descriptions and replacements makes them less usable for user agents while > screwing my dream of seamless accessibility. > > -- > Liam Quinn > Web Design Group Enhanced Designs, Web Site Development > http://www.htmlhelp.com/ http://enhanced-designs.com/ > >
Received on Monday, 4 May 1998 23:13:38 UTC