- From: Bailey, Bruce <Bruce.Bailey@ed.gov>
- Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 14:08:41 -0400
- To: "drs18" <drs18@psu.edu>, "Antony Tennant" <antonytennant@yahoo.co.uk>
- Cc: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
>> What WCAG1 AAA standard forbids requiring a frame capable browser? As Phil points out, my question was off topic. >> I like how Lynx handles frames. >> 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? > Seems clear enough. "Sorry, you need frames" isn't an equivalent. I don't believe I suggested that. The WAI techniques regarding frames and Checkpoint 1.1 hardly implies that the provision of complete alternative site version is necessary. I don't understand why commenters on this IG list are recommending such an approach as anything other than their own personal preference. 10.3 Writing for browsers that do not support FRAME http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-HTML-TECHS/#noframes The above sample links to another html page, but that is primarily for brevity of the example. The whole text-only contents could just as easily be there.
Received on Wednesday, 18 May 2005 18:15:33 UTC