- From: Patrick Burke <burke@ucla.edu>
- Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 09:25:13 -0700
- To: Jim Byrne <j.byrne@gcal.ac.uk>, W3c_Access <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Hi Jim, I don't think the EASI messages are archived (could be wrong, though), but in the WAI list archive there is an extensive discussion of frames issues from the week of Feb 14, 2000. I think most of the points raised are still valid: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ig/ (choose Jan-March, 2000) Patrick At 06:38 AM 4/24/2002, Jim Byrne wrote: >Thanks for your comments Patrick. > >I agree that the main problems are probably usability rather than >accessibility - but my gut feeling is this: if a major aim of the site is to >ensure that it is accessible then it is a bit 'off the mark' to decide to >design it using frames. > >Ideally I would like to be able to back my gut feeling up with some examples >and counter arguments about why using frames is the wrong way to go. However >if I'm wrong, and here is no real basis to argue against frames - then I >would also like to be hear the basis of that case. > >I'll check out the EASI list - I haven't looked - but I assume it is >archived somewhere?
Received on Wednesday, 24 April 2002 12:24:46 UTC