- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 15:05:31 -0500 (EST)
- To: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
- cc: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
No, they should be given access to what they can get. And they should get a message with it explaining why they are not getting good access. Blocking access to information is generally a bad thing, as many users are not in a position to upgrade every time an upgrade is avilable. Which does not excuse them of the responsibility, nor their adminstrators of realising that it is important. Chaals On Sun, 28 Oct 2001, Kynn Bartlett wrote: But were they right in theory if not practice? The Web Standards Project (www.webstandards.org) has this campaign to put something on your web site telling people using "broken browsers" to upgrade to something more standards compliant. Is that the right approach to take for accessibility's sake? Should someone using a "broken" assistive technology program which doesn't follow the standards closely enough be denied access? --Kynn http://www.webstandards.org/upgrade/what.html -- Charles McCathieNevile http://www.w3.org/People/Charles phone: +61 409 134 136 W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI fax: +1 617 258 5999 Location: 21 Mitchell street FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia (or W3C INRIA, Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France)
Received on Monday, 29 October 2001 15:05:41 UTC