- From: Brian Kelly <lisbk@ukoln.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 15:46:10 +0100
- To: Greg Lowney <greglo@microsoft.com>
- Cc: WAI IG <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
> I agree that a text-only site would be a disservice to the majority of > users, and less accessible to many, if it replaced the fully-formatted site, > or did not contain all the information, or was not kept up-to-date. However, > it seems to me that a parallel text-only site adds considerable value when > those pitfalls are avoided. I agree that a text-only representation of a web site shouldn't be automatically dismissed. A paper at last year's WWW conference gave an example of providing a text-only version of resources which are intended to be indexed by robots. Maintenance is an issue, but if this is done on-the-fly or by backend batch processing (rather than manually - which we know is unlikely to be maintained) this shouldn't be a major problem. Architecturally it's a bit of a fudge, but it may be a useful pragmatic solution. BTW is accessibility for robot software covered by the User-agent guidelines? Brian ------------------------------------------------------ Brian Kelly, UK Web Focus UKOLN, University of Bath, BATH, England, BA2 7AY Email: b.kelly@ukoln.ac.uk URL: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ Homepage: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/b.kelly.html Phone: 01225 323943 FAX: 01225 826838
Received on Friday, 21 May 1999 10:48:45 UTC