- From: Ian Anderson <lists@zstudio.co.uk>
- Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 12:12:13 +0100
- To: <sdale@stevendale.com>
- Cc: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
> I think debating, which screen reader to support or which browser is best > or even how to write one page which is presentable in all browsers, is an > argument that does not serve a constructive direction. I believe we need > to work more on separating content and presentation in the area of > accessibility and embrace the CSS and XSL technologies. For what happens > when the next device comes to market? Simple a new CSS stylesheet for > that device. I get the feeling you are not a web designer with a lot of experience of how things were in the mid 90's. What you are suggesting is a move towards balkanised sites, code forking and multiple site versions for specific use cases, the way it was in 1998. This is not what WCAG was about, and it is entirely contrary to the last five years development in web design, as we have slowly, torturously moved the entire industry towards accepting and using web standards. Why? So we can build one page. One page. That's the goal, the only solution to avoid disappearing up your own arse in a morass of browser hacks and conflicting rendering. I didn't live through all that with web design only to start the whole thing again with web accessibility. And anyway, I know CSS very well, and it does not even begin to address the issues I am dealing with. Some bespoke publishing system using XML, XSLT and this mod_accessibility thing could, but this is not widely applicable and is not appropriate to the IT and business constraints of the project. I work in the real world with existing sites and real constraints. Web accessibilty is capable of handling this without all these techie gimmicks, and in the real world I think technical solutions can only be a small part of any approach to these dilemmas.
Received on Friday, 16 April 2004 07:16:06 UTC