W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2012

Fwd: Re: UPDATE suggested alternatives to accessible version

From: Marc Haunschild <mh@zadi.de>
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 08:40:44 +0100
Message-ID: <4F434A7C.1060303@zadi.de>
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org

Hi there,

Am 18.02.2012 00:17, schrieb Carla:
>  You're idea is really the simplest solution indeed, and many websites would
>  be much more accessible with some 'switch to basic' layout. Especially those
>  that use a content management system.

I completely disagree - if the the dev team knows how to build
accessible websites, the "normal" layout should/will be accessible (more
or less). If not there probably was no time/budget for this (although a
lot of things don't cost a dime, if accessible web design is just the
way you work).

Especially if you use a CMS things get easier - after setting up a basic
set of accessible templates, its much faster than writing everything
again and again or copy things by hand.

>  The complexity comes when these websites are not static, or use advanced
>  features including flash.

Flash is not an advanced feature!

>  During a review of quite some websites, we
>  encountered a few of which the layout is too complex to redesign for
>  inclusion.

In my work, I never saw a layout, that was too complex to be made
accessible - but I saw a lot of layouts, which were not made for the web
at all, but for a sheet of paper 960 pixel wide and without a known height.

When I wasn't able to make a design accessible, it was not to complex,
it was to bad, probably not designed for the WEB at all...

Received on Tuesday, 21 February 2012 07:41:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:36:38 UTC