- From: David Poehlman <poehlman1@comcast.net>
- Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 10:03:48 -0500
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Thanks, that is wahat I was aiming at. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Julian Voelcker" <asp@tvw.net> To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org> Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 9:30 AM Subject: Re: Is it acceptable to provide two versions of a site to work around an accessibility problem? Hi David, Thanks for the further comments. I could use 'wcag compliant', but doubt that many people will know what it means. I think that I might just call the link 'full screen', 'flexible layout' or something along those lines and get the link to change the styles so that the layout is a flexible full width design. On Tue, 04 Mar 2003 08:49:16 -0500, David Poehlman wrote: > That's a good question, the main thing though is that it is not a text only > page for two reasons at least. one is that it separates us out as is > mentioned in another message and the other is that text only is not too > accessible. call it the universal link or the alternate link. I'm not sure > what to call it. It is certainly not non graphical some call them low > bandwidth but only if that is the case. > how about wcag compliant version link? Cheers, Julian Voelcker
Received on Tuesday, 4 March 2003 10:05:30 UTC