- From: Phill Jenkins <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 15:58:24 -0500
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OFEFC5841D.7ED2C519-ON86257006.006FE34A-86257006.00733656@us.ibm.com>
> > Also as a side query, does anyone have any stats on browsers used that ** do not understand frames. > >That's the wrong question. I think you mean which browsers don't >display frames as IE does. In which case the answer includes: > > Lynx (displays frame names as links) > W3C's own Amaya (more or less the same as Lynx) > WebTV (gateway converts to tables) > Most if not all PDA and mobile phone browsers. > All non-visual browsers, except tactile. Hmmm? Home Page Reader, traditional screen readers, and even my cell phone browser give me a list of the frames (similar to Lynx) and let me pick which frame to navigate to and read or interact with. This is nothing different than a traditional screen reader giving me a list of windows opened on my desktop, and allowing me to list them, navigate to one, and interact with it. However, Home Page Reader and many traditional screen readers speaking the content of a visual browser do also display the frame set visually as well - but the point is, that is not how you interact with a set of frames (or windows) through an audio (screen reader) interface - which is very sequential one at a time interface. You can't "hear" all the frames at the same time like a sighted user can see them at the same time. So both frames and frame sets can be accessible even thought there are necessarily different ways to render, navigate, and interact with them. Once each of the frames have titles, one of the only remaining true accessibility issue is how to author content in one frame that affects content in another frame and what to expect the user agent (browser and assistive technology) to do about it. No Frames doesn't really help in this situation. Frames are not the problem here either. The same thing can be done with a plain html page. For example when a user clicks on a link, a new page is loaded with 80% of the content the same, but the new and changed part has some additional meaning conveyed because of it's visual proximity or layout ONLY - that is the problem! The key words here are "additional" and "visual only". But, please do not confuse this with the whole concept of learning to use a software application. One enters data or clicks on links or buttons or whatever and things get processed and changed and re-displayed. All users have to then "learn" to use the application. If one user can't learn it because of a barrier, e.g., missing alternative text for an image, then that is an true accessibility concern. Regards, Phill
Received on Thursday, 19 May 2005 20:58:39 UTC