- From: <kynn-eda@idyllmtn.com>
- Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 08:35:22 -0800 (PST)
- To: harrry@email.com (Harry Woodrow)
- Cc: RRust@COVANSYS.com (RUST Randal), accessys@smart.net ('Access Systems'), w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Harry wrote:
> No it need not look exactly the same in every browser...that is how a print
> designer designs. It should have the same content available in every
> browser.
This is correct.
However, in the rest of this discussion, Bob and Harry are wrong. Because
they are confusing the _content_ with the _expression of the content_.
Randal is right.
The user -- disabled or otherwise -- should have access to the same
_information_. There is no mandate to access to each specific type
of expression of that information.
Examples:
Information = "the information on whether or not the freeway is
flowing quickly, and how fast it's flowing"
Expression #1 = "a color-coded map"
Expression #2 = "a textual table of information"
Information = "you're on Kynn's web site still"
Expression #1 = "the text at the top which says 'Kynn's web site'"
Expression #2 = "the visual similarity between this page and Kynn's
main homepage"
Information = "the Prime Minister's message to the people"
Expression #1 = "an audio file of his speech"
Expression #2 = "the transcript of his speech"
As long as the _information_ -- the _content_ -- is conveyed in some
other way, there's no problem with additional expressions designed for
specific audiences, such as an expression of the information designed
for visual users. For example, this is why the W3C has published
PDF versions of Recommendations; because the same content is available
in HTML and other formats _as well_.
Claims of discrimination and the idea that the author has no ability
to decide what is important are simply wrong and are at worst harmful
to the widespread acceptance of accessibility techniques.
--Kynn
Received on Friday, 18 January 2002 11:29:54 UTC