- From: David Poehlman <poehlman1@comcast.net>
- Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 08:09:22 -0400
- To: John Foliot - bytown internet <foliot@bytowninternet.com>, Robert Neff <robert.neff@uaccessit.com>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
there is so much rong with this logic that it scares me. It seems that the news papers have the right idea. They don't tell you to get an education in order to read them, they make their content available at the lowest meaningfull level possible. If I am not mistaken, it is still possible to read a news paper if you have a third grade education. Of course, that does not mean that you will be able to understand all of it but vast numbers of people who are not sofisticated do read them. I see accessibility nowhere in this message blelow and That is what this list is all about. I agree that the kind of matrix proposed initially might be impossible to produce though. I do urge us all though to center on the user and not the "standards". The standards are often written in a vac uum of sorts and than accessibility if possible is laid ontop of them if it fits. This though is changing and the world needs to wake up. Actually, much of the world has woken up, it is the us that needs to wake up and also the web standards project it seems. ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Foliot - bytown internet" <foliot@bytowninternet.com> To: "Robert Neff" <robert.neff@uaccessit.com>; <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 7:54 AM Subject: RE: compatibility Robert, If you are not already aware of the Web Standards Project (WaSP - http://www.webstandards.org) you might want to give them a visit. This battle was started in 1998, and for the most part has already been won. The issue is not that the browser manufacturers aren't listening and moving forward, but rather that users (in particular large institutions) refuse to get with the program and upgrade their baseline browsers. NN4.x is more than 5 years old now (NN4.0B1 - Dec. 1996), and the last build of Netscape 4 (4.5 - subsequent versions simply addressed bugs) was released in 1998. There needs to be a reasonible expectation that users will seek to upgrade and improve their browsers (especially given the cost factor <grin>). And so, code to the standards and not to the browsers! The matrix you seek would be almost impossible to compile, given the variety of browsers on the market, the different operating systems in use, not to mention alternative user agents such as cell phones, Web TV and PDA's - the different combinations are almost limitless. WaSP's current headlines include a piece on a company known as 37signals, a web design outfit. They include the following interesting piece of code on their web site: <div class="oldbrowsers"> <strong>Please note:</strong> This site's design is only visible in a graphical browser that supports Web standards, but its content is accessible to any browser or Internet device. To see this site as it was designed please <a href="http://www.webstandards.org/upgrade/" title="The Web Standards Project's BROWSER UPGRADE initiative.">upgrade to a Web standards compliant browser</a>. </div> FWIW JF > -----Original Message----- > From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org]On > Behalf Of Robert Neff > Sent: July 15, 2002 1:51 PM > To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > Subject: RE: compatibility > > > > I am referencing Greg's remarks. > > A negative connotation could be inferred by this. Yet we see this > already but in another form and that is "works best with this browser > and version" and I will not state the web sites and browsers. > > I would like to see a compliance matrix that would be a reference tool > developers, managers and professionals could refer. I would not be > opposed to putting an accessibility statement that states "we have > designed our site to meet the W3C and 508 requirements, however, here is > how your web browser or assistive device interprets the guidelines." > Maybe interpret is a misleading word, however, maybe there is a more > appropriate word, but I think the point is made. > > This is where we would need a matrix for everyone to view AND THIS WOULD > BE A GRASS ROOTS EFFORT THAT WOULD HIGHLIGHT THE ISSUES AND MAYBE SOME > COMPANIES WOULD TAKE THIS SERIOUSLY. > > Does the page authoring tools group have anything like this? > > Robert Neff > robert.neff@uaccessit.com > 214.213.1979 > >
Received on Tuesday, 16 July 2002 08:13:18 UTC