- From: Phill Jenkins <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 13:44:08 -0600
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Isofarro wrote: ><clipped> >The second issue, which certainly seems odd to me, is the issue with frames. >There are parts of the site which are framed (into a top banner and bottom >menu, with the content in the middle). To make these pages compliant, only >Checkpoint 12.1 and 12.2 seem to be required, stating: > ><clipped> > >So that means just putting title attributes to frame elements and describe >the purpose of frames is sufficient to make them accessible? Checkpoint 1.1 [see WCAG] also mentions frames: However there are two different interpretations of the checkpoint. One is that FRAMES themselves are non-text elements irregardless of their content and must be usable without FRAME support. And the second is that FRAMES may contain content that requires text equivalents. In other words, a FRAMESET that only contains textual elements such as paragraphs and headings would (in my opinion) be no less accessible than separate pages for each frame of the same textual content - assuming the title of each frame is equivalent to the title of each separate page. Of course there are other printing and usability concerns with frames, but fundamentally meeting 12.1 and 12.2 cover the accessibility concerns with FRAMES except for the case when the content of the FRAME is a non-text element. For example when the content of the frame is only an image file there is no way to include alt-text unless the content of the FRAME is an HTML file [See FRAME TECHNIQUES]. I generally agree with the second interpretation, that FRAMES are just another element of HTML and is or is not supported by the browser and/or assistive technology. Once the user's configuration supports FRAMES, then to make them accessible checkpoints 12.2 and 12.2 apply. The policy decision that needs to be made first is whether on not FRAME sites are to be supported. For example, a company, government, or institution may decide to not allow FRAMESET site for various reasons - once that policy is made, then WCAG can be applied. If the policy only mentions WCAG and not FRAMES specifically, that WCAG is ambiguous (in my opinion) towards FRAMES and results in the frustration you are experiencing. [WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 1.1] http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/#gl-provide-equivalents [FRAME Techniques] http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-HTML-TECHS/#frames Regards, Phill Jenkins IBM Research Division - Accessibility Center http://www.ibm.com/able
Received on Tuesday, 7 January 2003 14:44:44 UTC