W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2005

RE: frames and no frames content

From: Bailey, Bruce <Bruce.Bailey@ed.gov>
Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 14:08:41 -0400
Message-ID: <CCDBDCBFA650F74AA88830D4BACDBAB50B2D4636@wdcrobe2m02.ed.gov>
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

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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:36:25 UTC