W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 2002

RE: compatibility

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <GV@TRACE.WISC.EDU>
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 11:24:45 -0500
To: "'RUST Randal'" <RRust@COVANSYS.com>, "'Robert Neff'" <robert.neff@uaccessit.com>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Message-id: <000e01c22c1c$2626d220$b817a8c0@laptop600>


Interesting idea.
But it can also give accessibility a bad name.  especially since many
people will put it on pages that break other browsers unnecessarily.   I
can see someone putting this on pages that work only with the latest
browsers.     That isn't appropriate,  but they could do it and give 508
and W3C a bad name in the process.


Gregg Vanderheiden Ph.D.
Ind Engr - Biomed - Trace,  Univ of Wis


> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org] On
> Of RUST Randal
> Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 9:54 AM
> To: 'Robert Neff'; w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> Subject: RE: compatibility
> >Would be interesting approach if web sites would start putting up
> >disclaimers that said, "We code in accord with the W3C or 508
> >and thus are not responsible for how the content is displayed on
> >non-compatible web browsers."
> Very interesting, Robert.  I think this is a pretty good idea, because
> think it's rather silly to create standards-compliant, accessible
markup and
> code that breaks in a five-year-old browser such as NN 4.x.  Plus,
> approach actually tells the user what those CSS  and XHTML icons at
> bottom of your web page really mean:)
> Randal
Received on Monday, 15 July 2002 12:24:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:36:10 UTC