- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2001 13:39:05 -0500 (EST)
- To: Phill Jenkins <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>
- cc: David Poehlman <poehlman1@home.com>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Yes, Lynx does need to support Javascript and a couple of other things before it allows people to access a better more accessible web that we could have. Or people need to use a different system. Unfortunately, IBM doesn't appear to have provided a version of Home Page Reader for MacOS or Linux, the two operating systems I use every day. And won't run on the Windows system I ahve available to me - a Windows 95 computer. Although I am pleased to note that it will be available in some languages other than english in just under three months. There is an open issue in the WCAG guidelines group about how we work out what support it is reasonable to require of users. Lynx is a pertinent example, since it is free, is available for almost any system in use, and is known to work with almost any assistive technology. (This was, if I recall, the specific reason for reducing the priority of several WCAG checkpoints in version 1.0 - users could always install Lynx, and that would give them access to, for example, linearised tables.) It is important to recognise there are limits to what people can afford to do. It is equally important to recognise that individuals do have some responsibility for helping themselves. In Australian law, a company that won't provide a piece of software that is widely available and used would need a pretty good reason for it if the alternative was to discriminate against someone with a disability. But it is a tough argument that a small business with a turnover of several thousand dollars a year (in some countries that isn't such a small business) ought to spend more than a thousand dollars a year on upgrading systems to enable a person with a disability to keep their job. Someone has to carry the burden. Our job is to determine how the burdens can be reduced. To do that well we need up to date information on what the real problems are and what the real solutions are (and they do change with time). enough philosophical rant... Cheers Charles McCN On Fri, 5 Jan 2001, Phill Jenkins wrote: David wrote: > what happens here though when you use something like lynx or ibm home > page reader or pwwebspeak? > In lynx for instance, java[script] is ignored and if there is no other > way to access or manipulate the content, we fail to access. IBM Home Page Reader version 3.0 now supports JavaScript very nicely. Perhaps lynx and others need to add support for JavaScript since it can be accessible. All the burden can't be placed on the web designers and developers. Regards, Phill Jenkins IBM Research Division - Accessibility Center http://www.ibm.com/able -- Charles McCathieNevile mailto:charles@w3.org phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136 W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053, Australia until 6 January 2001 at: W3C INRIA, 2004 Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Saturday, 6 January 2001 13:40:08 UTC