- 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
Hmmmm 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 ------------------------------------ Gregg Vanderheiden Ph.D. Ind Engr - Biomed - Trace, Univ of Wis gv@trace.wisc.edu > -----Original Message----- > From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org] On Behalf > 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 standards > >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 I > 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, this > approach actually tells the user what those CSS and XHTML icons at the > bottom of your web page really mean:) > > Randal
Received on Monday, 15 July 2002 12:24:53 UTC