- From: Andrew Johns <andrew.johns@jkd.co.uk>
- Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 12:52:50 +0100
- To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
I was actually referring to this article: http://www.alistapart.com/stories/journey/ but, after re-reading it, I realise that I have misinterpreted it - they weren't hiding the content, just the presentation. Thanks for clearing that up, and thanks for all the urls to some useful articles. Regards, Andrew Johns -----Original Message----- From: Tom James [mailto:tom.james@digitext.com] Sent: 19 June 2002 12:34 To: 'w3c-wai-ig@w3.org' Subject: RE: Standards Compliant = No support for NN4? Andrew Johns wrote ... > An author on "A List Apart" suggests that I shouldn't bother > attempting to make it compatible with NN 4. They suggest > hiding the site content from them, and give an explanation > that the site is standards compliant, therefore works only in > standards compliant browsers and other accessibility devices, > and that for them to see the site they must get a standards > compliant browser. I think this is a misreading of the idea, which was also promoted by the Web Standards Project (WaSP). My understanding of the idea was: 1) You write a page in valid code, marked-up structurally 2) You arrange for the stylesheet to do presentational things, but only to load for standards-compliant browsers. (My prefered method for this is to use an @import rule to hide the content from CSS-aware, but non-standards-following, browsers.) and optionally 3) You add a paragraph at the top of the page (in a style hidden using the stylesheet) that explains that the page will look plain, but still be readable, for non-standards compliant browsers. Hence, NN4 users see all of the content, but it just follows their default browser settings. And depending on your use of e.g. CSS positioning, it may also be linearised as well. This is certainly the technique used by alistapart. On my own site, I have tried to use a two-column CSS positioning layout for both NN4 and more compliant browsers. However, NN4 is very sensitive to minor code errors (I know, I should validate every page ...) and I am tempted by the ALA / WaSP technique. But this is a personal site, and I suspect a commercial site would probably find this harder to justify. URLs: ALA http://www.alistapart.com and in particular http://www.alistapart.com/stories/netscape/ WaSP http://www.webstandards.org/ and in particular http://webstandards.org/act/campaign/buc/tips.html P.S. I'm not affiliated in any way with either organisation. Tom Dr Tom James Senior Consultant =============================================================== Digitext - Online Information at Work Telephone: +44 (0)1844 214690 Fax: +44 (0)1844 213434 Email: tom.james@digitext.com Web: http://www.digitext.com/ _____________________________________________________________________ VirusChecked by the Incepta Group plc _____________________________________________________________________
Received on Wednesday, 19 June 2002 07:53:15 UTC