- From: Nick Traenkner <nick@kentinfoworks.com>
- Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 15:03:30 -0400
- To: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-hwg@idyllmtn.com>
- CC: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Kynn Bartlett wrote: > It's another issue, too. I (and others) maintain that properly > done HTML means accessible HTML, and that means no need for a > text-only copy. And of course browsers which support the mechanisms available to make work those pages which require no text-only views. While they are getting better, I am (as I am sure many here are) disillusioned by the progress of both Microsoft and that other company that I can't remember at the moment (started with an N I think...). I am sure this has a lot to do with the fact that although it seems old hat to me, HTML4 and CSS etc... are young reccomendations. But this is a real problem right now- some (business) clients demand hacked HTML- in this case, text-only looks like a good solution, especially if you can do it without duplication. They aren't concerned that the AOL 3.0 browser that doesn't support CSS will render a page readable- they're concerned that it will render the page "ugly"- image is very important to them (though I do fight against 'marketing creep' as much as possible, in favor of accessible information). > Three words: "Separate. But. Equal." You will people who very > strongly consider the idea of "ghettoization" of the disabled to > be a worse sin than inaccessible pages. While I am not quite so > dogmatic about this, I can certainly see the point and I think > there is an implicit assumption that "disabled folks cannot use > the web as well as others can, therefore we need to make special > accomodations for them" and that is insulting when in reality, > NO SPECIAL ACCOMODATIONS ARE NEEDED, JUST PROPER APPLICATION OF > HTML IN ALL CIRCUMSTANCES. This is not so much a usability issue then as it is a political issue (not to imply political = not important). By offering a text-only view of a site, you are creating information ghettos. Interesting point- one I would not have considered, being disability-impaired. My view is that until everyone supports the proper application of HTML/CSS special accomodations may be neccessary for those web authors who must work within the constraints of a customer with high-visibility (actually the trick is getting them to constrain themselves). > Sorry for raising my voice. No problem, just as long as the voices aren't so loud that no one hears what is being said. -nick
Received on Friday, 21 May 1999 15:03:36 UTC