- From: Dave J Woolley <DJW@bts.co.uk>
- Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 20:28:53 +0100
- To: "'w3c-wai-ig@w3c.org'" <w3c-wai-ig@w3c.org>
> From: Michael W Baker [SMTP:bakerm@zin-tech.com] > > I am developing accessibility standards for my company. We do government > sub contracting and a lot of government sites use Front Page for design. I > need to explore accessibility solutions (or have definitive reasons why it > can't be done)for this product. > Are there ways of designing accessibly with Front Page? [DJW:] I'm pretty sure that if you know how to write HTML you can write good HTML in Front Page. The problem is that the user interface encourages bad habits, and it seems that it is fairly easy to generate invalid HTML as well. Early versions generate a document type that only permits HTML 2.0, which will need fixing for most pages! The sorts of ways that it encourages problems are by making presentational features easy to use, by putting them on the tool bar, but hiding the proper structural ones; I think that is consistent with the target WYSISWYG market. Obviously it also encourages the use of canned formats, automation etc. > Is it possible to fix a page designed on Front Page? [DJW:] Dave Raggett's Tidy program was designed to try to create valid HTML from it. Accessibility requires human intervention though. > Are there any resources addressing this issue? > (Personally I would never use this product, but I need to deal with a lot > of Front Page sites and Front Page users.) > > [DJW:] There's actually an accessibility thread running on the lynx-dev mailing list in which two different sites (I think Ohio State is the problem one and a newspaper the good one) are producing pages with a Front Page meta tag (possibly hand retouched) and one is virtually unnavigable text only, whereas the other is no problem. The fundamental problem is almost certainly that the people who like using Front Page don't like to think about information (as against specified browser graphic) design. -- --------------------------- DISCLAIMER --------------------------------- Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of BTS.
Received on Monday, 31 July 2000 15:29:04 UTC