- From: <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 16:31:46 -0600
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org, kathleen.anderson@po.state.ct.us
Kathleen wrote: >... Granted, there are other browsers that people in this situation can use, >however, as a state government, we are not in a position to make these >browser choices or mandates for our constituents. We need to to >accommodate their browser of choice, and their connection by necessity. >... Why not? Don't users and agencies that support users also have a role or responsibility? Why is it O.K. to mandate the web authors and browser manufactures to follow guidelines, but not require users to upgrade? No government agency [as far as I know] is forcing anyone to use the Web to access the services. There is still some phone access and snail-mail hard copy version of the service. But the agency is saying or at least implying that to use the Web services you need a browser and web connection. Why not specify a compliant spec for such "browsers of choice"? Many on this list that know me know I'm playing a little devils advocate here. But I do believe that the notion of "requiring a certain browser" could be re-stated in a more "accessible-friendly request" such as "requiring a user agent that can handle the level 4.1 HTML spec". No one should be requiring a "certain browser", but shouldn't it be OK to say that the "browser of choice" should support some level of HTML - such as HTML 4.1. The problem is that there is not a single browser that supports the needs of all users. Many have incorrectly used the short hand of "browser x level y" to signify the level of HTML and all the "rendering" capabilities needed by some majority of users. It's that "short hand" that leaves out what is or should really be stated. So agencies, libraries facilities, etc., and many times the constituents themselves need to be requested to take part in the solution. An example: If one wants to utilize the closed captions on TV broadcasts, one has to purchase the capable TV set. Sure, all the manufacturers were mandated to include the circuitry into the newer TV sets, but the user still had to buy the newer set. or in other words [replace "TV broadcasts" with "Web content" and replace "TV sets" with "user agents" and you get] : If one wants to utilize the accessible Web content, one has to purchase the capable browser+assistive technology combination. Sure, all the user agent manufacturers are being requested to include the "software circuitry" into the newer user agents, but the user still has to upgrade to the newer or add an additional user agent. Regards, Phill Jenkins
Received on Monday, 17 January 2000 17:37:38 UTC