- From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
- Date: Fri, 03 Sep 1999 08:29:00 -0400
- To: Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
- Cc: Kasday@acm.org
The note should come from Len, and it should be an invitation to join in the ER IG where knotty issues such as what to do in a checker with un-implemented markup are being thrashed out as we speak. Al At 09:03 PM 9/2/99 -0700, Kynn Bartlett wrote: >I ran a test on http://www.hwg.org/ at http://www.netmechanic.com/ >today. > >They told me that I'd "misspelled" a lot of words, like XML and >XHTML, plus they kindly informed me that <!DOCTYPE> is not a valid >HTML tag. > >The thing that scares the heck out of the accessibility instructor >within me is rating of our "browser compatability". The things it >identifies as "incompatible" all fall into one of the two >categories: > >(a) Style sheet support, such as SPAN elements or CLASS/ID > attributes, which specifically degrade gracefully when CSS > is not present, and >(b) Attributes/elements added for accessibility's sake, such > as IMG LONGDESC, HTML LANG, ABBR, or LABEL. > >Now, I don't mind being identified as "incompatible" with old >versions of browsers, but the PROBLEM here is their "advice" to >web designers: > >"Try to avoid using a tag or attribute if it is incompatible with >more than 10% of your audience." > >THIS IS SO UTTERLY WRONG. > >Here's what they say for LONGDESC: > >Tag: IMG >Attribute: LONGDESC >Lines: 78 >Visitors Affected: 99.00% >Microsoft: > 3: N > 4: N > 5: N >Netscape: > 2: N > 3: N > 4: N > >In other words, since 99% of browsers out there don't use the >information, you shouldn't include LONGDESC. > >In short: > > Their advice is actively ANTI-ACCESSIBLE. > >Would someone care to join me in writing to these people about the >inherent problems in advising against the use of proper HTML code >as they are doing here? It might mean more if we all got together. > >This could also be an issue for the evaluation/repairs tools to >look at, but I don't know what exactly you'd want to do. > >PS: The url below expires in 2 days. > >--Kynn > >>Date: Thu, 2 Sep 1999 22:59:18 -0400 >>To: kynn@kynn.com >>Subject: NetMechanic Results >>From: webmaster@netmechanic.com >> >>[ad snipped] >> >>NetMechanic has completed the tests you requested for: >> >>http://www.hwg.org/ >>Job Configuration: One Page, Local Links, Remote Links, Images, HTML Standard: HTML Version 4.0 Standard >> >>You can find your results at: >> >>http://beta.netmechanic2.com/summary.cgi?f=244225225-06389s=NetMechanic&fv=2 >> >>Reports will be stored at this URL for the next 2 days. >> >> >> > >-- >Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com> http://www.kynn.com/ >Chief Technologist, Idyll Mountain Internet http://www.idyllmtn.com/ >Catch the Web Accessibility Meme! http://aware.hwg.org/ >
Received on Friday, 3 September 1999 08:21:42 UTC