Re: Server Side Include Accessibility

At 06:11 AM 2002-06-27, Kirsten Williams wrote:

>I've searched but can't find any information as to the accessibility of
>server side includes. Is it acceptable for accessibility purposes to use SSI
>to create a "text only" version of a website, so that the graphics and
>javascript are removed but the content of the site is exactly the same
>between the "text-only" and full versions of the site?  Thank you in advance
>for any assistance in this matter.

You won't find anything definitive.

It's not not allowed.  Pardon the double negative, but look at the latest
"requirements for WCAG 2.0, specifically the consensus item S1.  

QUOTE

  S1 - Serving content in different forms to meet different user needs
  and preferences is an acceptable way to comply with the guidelines, as
  long as the different forms:
    * are complete (i.e., they provide equivalents for all the content),
    * can be obtained from visiting the same URI
    * are up to date, and
    * can be easily selected according to user preferences.

  Note: We will not make any assumptions in this Requirements document
  about the method that is used, whether it is content negotiation or a
  link. The issue of where and how the user sets their preferences is an
  item that has not been discussed.

END QUOTE
Reference: http://www.w3.org/TR/wcag2-req/

You can do this but you have to still take responsibility for the completeness
of the result.

It is recognized that it is a lot easier to keep text-only sites for example
up to date and complete when using server-side page generation techniques.

Tesco is an example where it seems to have been done reasonably successufully, 
from what I hear.

 Tesco Internet Superstore Login page (parallel site example)
 http://www.tesco.com/access/default.asp

Al


>Kirsten Williams
>Web Designer
>University of Edinburgh Management School
>7 Bristo Square
>Edinburgh
>EH8 9AL
>+44 0131 650 9505

Received on Thursday, 27 June 2002 08:00:46 UTC