- From: Steven McCaffrey <smccaffr@MAIL.NYSED.GOV>
- Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2000 09:54:28 -0500
- To: <rbrown@blackboard.com>, <EASI-ED3@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
- Cc: <disacc@onelist.com>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Reidy: I am glad you are asking the question. I don't think "lowest common denominator" is the phrase I would choose. I prefer "best possible interface so the most people can enjoy/benefit from their visit to my site". I agree with David's viewpoint. I would like to elaborate a bit. You say " if you are creating an alternate accessible interface, should it be a text-only interface, or a text-accessible interface?" This implies, of course, you have already decided to provide an "alternative" interface, and it is just a question of which kind, right? My question is, do you need an alternative interface? sometimes, especially in the case of a highly dynamic page employing say Java scripts or Java applets, an alternative is actually required. Is this behind your question? There is the means-ends distinction. What the interface should be and how you create it are different questions. I think you recognize this when you say, "There are essentially two ways to play this-- do the simplest, safest (?) text version, or go with a slightly more developed version that could eventually be "spiffed up" with CSS... and (possibly) become the primary UI." According to, DRAFT: Accessibility Features of CSS W3C NOTE 9 Mar 1999 This Version: http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/NOTE-css-access-19990309 "... Authors should always design documents that make sense without style sheets (i.e., the document should be written in a "logical" order) and then apply style sheets to achieve visual effects." This is very similar to what you said. I think that the method for designing anything whether a web site or page, script, or applet begins with writing a clear, simple plain text outline of the content and/or purpose. If visual effects are neededd, add CSS. The only case that require a completely separate alternative page or interface is where that content by its very nature of presentation or interactivity cannot bbe used by some mode of access. A few instances: 1. A deaf person cannot hear audio so provide a text transcript. 2. A blind person cannot see pictures or charts or diagrams or video, so provide a text description sufficiently detailed to allow the blind person to gain equivalent information or service. To sum up, two principles: 1. Clearly identify the purpose of: a. site; b. page; c. element or mode of delivry. 2. Separate means from ends. 3. Separate presentation from structure and content Always ask yourself: What am I trying to do with this page? Provide information? provide a service? Get feedback? Allow the user to perform some action based on the user's input/commands? Am I presupposing one input/output mode of access? (hearing, sight, keyboard, mouse, voice-input)? If I am presupposing one particular mode, what structure/content would be most useful for other modes? I have more technical comments on the problems tables pose for the blind if you are interested. -Steve Steve McCaffrey Senior Programmer/Analyst Information Technology Services new York State Department of Education (518)-473-3453
Received on Friday, 7 January 2000 09:56:10 UTC