- From: Kristine Bradow <kbradow@ece.eng.wayne.edu>
- Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1999 13:04:09 -0500
- To: Scott Luebking <phoenixl@netcom.com>
- Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org, Bob Erlandson <rerlands@ece.eng.wayne.edu>
With regard to DHTML, I've been doing some work with Microsoft InterDev recently to build a web front end for a database. According to MS documentation, I was under the impression that DHTML is only IE-friendly. That's why I didn't use it--*.asp seemed to be the only alternative. I viewed your page successfully in Netscape 4.05, but I'm curious as to how cross-browser friendly DHTML is. Is DHTML more accessible than asp? Thanks, Kristine Bradow Wayne State University Detroit, MI 48202 (313) 577-1791 Scott Luebking wrote: > Hi, > A complaint that I've heard from various blind web page users is that > they often have to read through all sorts of navigation links before > they can get to the "meat" of the page. This means that they can > be less efficient than their sighted counter-parts. (Since > I'm of the school of thought that accessibility must include > efficiency, I believe that this is an important aspect to consider > for web page accessibility.) > > Dynamic HTML is becoming more popular for web pages. I figured it might be > interesting to use dynamic HTML to improve the efficiency of blind > people navigating through a web page. By incorporating features > of dynamic HTML, I re-wrote one of BART's web pages so that the navigation > bars are invisible. This means that there are much fewer links to read through. > Two links are provided to show the navigation bar. One shows a graphic > version while the other shows a text-only version. If you would like > to take a look at this version of the web page, the URL is: > > http://members.aol.com/criptrip/alt_bart_page.html > > There are some interesting benefits to the approach. The page becomes much simpler > to read for blind people and people with certain types of learning > disabilities. More screen real estate is freed up. The pages are easier > to write since less effort is needed to find visually pleasing ways > to include links. The pages can look less clutered. > > There might be some problems to this approach. Some screenreaders > are not up to handling dynamic HTML. Some non-disabled may not want > to do an extra mouse click to see the navigation bar. Lynx users may have > a problem with dynamic HTML. > > Let me know what you think. > > Scott
Received on Sunday, 28 March 1999 12:54:54 UTC