- From: Bailey, Bruce <Bruce.Bailey@ed.gov>
- Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 10:11:48 -0400
- To: "Access Systems" <accessys@smart.net>, "Antony Tennant" <antonytennant@yahoo.co.uk>
- Cc: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
> most text browsers that I am aware of do not do frames. > or don't do em well... I like how Lynx handles frames. What text browsers are you referring to? I find the exposed messages about "this site requires a frame capable browser" to be quite ironic. Why not just list the purpose of the different of frames and the URLs to them in the NOFRAMES content area and be done with it? If the site author thinks frames are otherwise an integral feature to their content, who are we to disagree? It is pretty obvious that if they could code an equivalent version without frames, they would do so. Recommending anything beyond "Title each frame to facilitate frame identification and navigation" is more than WCAG1 A (12.1) requires and going beyond meaningful NOFRAMES content is more than WCAG1 AA (12.2) requires. What WCAG1 AAA standard forbids requiring a frame capable browser?
Received on Wednesday, 18 May 2005 14:16:01 UTC