- From: david.bacon <david.bacon@jkd.co.uk>
- Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 14:15:48 -0000
- To: "'Jason Megginson'" <jason@bartsite.com>, "'Scott Luebking'" <phoenixl@sonic.net>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <D1EFBFDCD178C24DA607A306D6E3A71106072E@URANUs>
I thought the label tag ruined layouts in NS6. I've done a test page with no style sheets and just a simple form in a table. When the layout tag was placed around text it jumped out of the cell and covered the form element in the adjacent cell. This bug has been documented and is probably the reason the label tag is not as widely used as it should be. After all, a major flaw in layout takes precedence over accessibilty. David Bacon. -----Original Message----- From: Jason Megginson [mailto:jason@bartsite.com] Sent: 14 December 2001 14:09 To: 'Scott Luebking'; w3c-wai-ig@w3.org Subject: RE: Fwd from CHI-WEB: Amazon's version for the Visually Impaired I found the site to be lacking attributes and tags necessary to be truly "accessible". <Label for=""> and id attributes, for "explicit labeling" for instance, are missing. I agree with David that if they would do it right the first time, an alternate site would not be needed. Jason Megginson Access Technology Specialist Bartimaeus Group jason@bartsite.com www.bartsite.com -----Original Message----- From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Scott Luebking Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 8:56 PM To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org Subject: Fwd from CHI-WEB: Amazon's version for the Visually Impaired Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 09:57:12 +0100 From: jernu@VISUALFRIENDLY.COM Subject: Amazon's version for the Visually Impaired Hello all, Do you know that amazon.com has developped a specific version of the site for the Visually Impaired ? See http://www.ecommercetimes.com/perl/story/15199.html for an article and http://www.amazon.com/access to reach the site. When we saw it we (the usability team) say : - oupsss !!! (we provide an ASP software which is able to transform web sites in an accessible and personalized way for all the visually impaired (including blind and all people who need some visual comfort)) - great !!! they did a good job and all the pages are designed in the good way : no more graphic (but a text only version yet exist), no more marketing blabla, search engine in the top and so on... We ask on a french list for the blind what they think about this site, the way it is designed and is utility... For the moment, we are very surprised by the answers ! Blind people do not find it so efficient : they have the feeling of a "poor site" and they absolutely dislike that there are two versions of the same site : one for "normal" people and one for "visually impaired" ! They think designers have to put all their efforts in designing one and only one site, and not to make "ghettos" for the blind. What do you think about that ? It seems that the text only version is preferred because much more informations are presents ! Someone has tested this version ? Is it the better way to improve accessibility (visual accessibility) ? And what about the URL ? Is it the good name ? Of course, i will try to make a summary to the list of all the answers i will get ! Thank you PS : I am french, please excuse my english ! :) Jerome. _____________________________________________________________________ VirusChecked by the Incepta Group plc _____________________________________________________________________
Received on Friday, 14 December 2001 09:16:01 UTC