- From: TAYLOR-MADE <taymade@niia.net>
- Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 10:39:34 -0600
- To: <webmaster@dors.sailorsite.net>
- Cc: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
I believe it to be: (1) re-coding to the page (keeping the original appearance) to use valid and accessible html. It is time-consuming to try to keep two identical sites up and one often forgets to update the text only sites,especially when very busy. joyce -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Bailey <bbailey@clark.net> To: David Poehlman <poehlman@clark.net> Cc: Web Accessibility Initiative <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>; kathleen.anderson@po.state.ct.us <kathleen.anderson@po.state.ct.us> Date: Tuesday, January 11, 2000 7:28 AM Subject: RE: city of hartford site has a text only? >David Poehlman wrote: >> can someone tell me if this should have been necessary? >> Thanks, url below. >> http://ci.hartford.ct.us/ > >In a word, no -- but then you knew that! >Anyone on the list in Connecticut want to take the Kynn challenge and create >an accessible version of this home page for them? >It looks like the authors constrained themselves to using FrontPage which, >from my experimentation with it, makes writing valid html difficult. > >Kathleen Anderson wrote: >> I'm not sure what you mean by 'necessary', but, until user agents >> support alt tags for the hotspots in client-side image maps, or until >> the City eliminates the image map altogether, I believe he did the >> reasonable thing. > >At this point, don't user agents support alt tags for hotspots in >client-side image maps quite well? I am not sure about Netscape, but hasn't >I.E. 4.01 (and latter, w/ JFW) supported client-side image maps (that had >alt text of course) for like over a year now? Has it not been a few years >since Lynx had this feature? > >I offer this question up to the group: >Given a broken page to start with, which is more "reasonable", (1) re-coding >to the page (keeping the original appearance) to use valid and accessible >html, or (2) creating a text-only version of the page? >I have my prejudices, but I would like to hear some other opinions! > >-- Bruce Bailey > >
Received on Tuesday, 11 January 2000 11:38:27 UTC