- From: David Poehlman <poehlman1@home.com>
- Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 11:37:05 -0500
- To: "Carol Foster" <c.foster@umassp.edu>
- Cc: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
content negotiation means that by some means, determine the appropriate content to deliver. this is not the same as having an alternate site but allows the same information to be presented differently depending on either user choice or the server determining what is asking for the content. This is in keeping with a last resort stand on separate but equal or in the case we are talking about, seemingly not as equal as it should be. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Carol Foster" <c.foster@umassp.edu> To: "David Poehlman" <poehlman1@home.com> Cc: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org> Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 11:31 AM Subject: Re: FWD: CHI-WEB: Amazon's version for the Visually Impaired My interpretation is also that it is OK to have alternative presentations when they are all "served from the same bucket" as mentioned, and that this is even a recommended thing. There is a relevant current (WCAG 1.0) Priority 3 checkpoint: 11.3 Provide information so that users may receive documents according to their preferences (e.g., language, content type, etc.). The techniques for this point mention CSS2 techniques and something called "content negotiation" which is not entirely clear to me. Carol David Poehlman wrote: > as I understand the excerpt, it is a server/client side choice issue. > this is enterpretted to me as being that content is served from the same > bucket and the user has the choice. I see no reason why we should lower > the bar. The guidelines are still in draft so I wouldn't relie on > anything in them to be deffinitive on the final.
Received on Friday, 14 December 2001 11:36:57 UTC