- From: Kristine Bradow <kbradow@ece.eng.wayne.edu>
- Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 23:03:22 -0400
- To: Charles McCathieNevile <charlesn@sunrise.srl.rmit.edu.au>
- Cc: Liam Quinn <liam@htmlhelp.com>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
I agree with Charles. "Separate but Equal" is not the answer here. Charles McCathieNevile wrote: > If seamless accessibility means presenting different material to > different audiences, each audience not knowing what the other is getting, > then I am not at all in favour of it. > > I am, like I suspect most people here, in favour of solutions to > accessibilty problems which do not rely on the 'get a life - download > hotbrowser version 567 for the BBC Micro to see this website' approach. > > Charles McCathieNevile > > On Mon, 4 May 1998, Liam Quinn wrote: > > > > > ><OBJECT DATA="logo.gif" TYPE="image/gif" TITLE="XYZ Company logo"> > > > XYZ Company <A HREF="logo.html" TITLE="Logo description">logo > > >description</A> > > ></OBJECT> > > > > LQ:: Sure, but what about my last sentence: > > > > >> When > > >> we start mixing an object's description and replacement (as has long been > > >> done with IMG's ALT attribute), we make it difficult for user agents to > > >> render content without the seams from a visual Web becoming a distraction. > > > > LQ:: I won't use long descriptions if it means that seamless accessibility > > becomes impossible. (This is why I don't use D-links.) > > > > -- > > Liam Quinn > > Web Design Group Enhanced Designs, Web Site Development > > http://www.htmlhelp.com/ http://enhanced-designs.com/ > > > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 20 May 1998 22:59:07 UTC