- From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 23:33:55 +0000
- To: WAI Interest Group <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Phill Jenkins wrote: > So, is there anything wrong for a company to offer a dynamically text > generated page - not in my mind. In fact, it may offers functionality to > users who don't have the functionality on their client. This begs the question: who are the users that require a pure text-only version? Specifically: which users who don't have access to a text-only browser or screen reader / brailler need a text-only version? Are they using lynx because they're in a DOS environment? In this scenario, their use of lynx would not be by choice, and - all other things being equal - the server-generated page, viewed through lynx, would give no additional benefit (it may even be worse). Forgive me if I'm missing the obvious answer, but I can't come up with a scenario... P -- Patrick H. Lauke __________________________________________________________ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __________________________________________________________ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __________________________________________________________
Received on Tuesday, 7 March 2006 23:34:06 UTC