- From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
- Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2009 15:07:45 +0200
- To: "Simon Harper" <simon.harper@manchester.ac.uk>, "UAWG list" <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
On Fri, 24 Apr 2009 12:47:56 +0200, Simon Harper
<simon.harper@manchester.ac.uk> wrote:
> Hi there, I was just wondering if we'd discussed this before, but could
> a specialist browser (say voice only) get a UAAG validation; if there
> was no provision for sighted users or AT?
It has been discussed in the distant past, and I think the answer is that
in general it wouldn't, although there are generally ways that it could be
made to conform. (Without provision for AT it's hard to claim
accessibility or even justify trying to make such a claim).
cheers
> I'm thinking, an onboard audio UA in a car, say?
>
> Cheers
> Si.
>
> =======================
>
> Simon Harper
> University of Manchester (UK)
>
> Human Centred Web Lab: http://hcw.cs.manchester.ac.uk
>
> My Site: http://hcw.cs.manchester.ac.uk/people/harper/
> My Diary (Web): http://hcw.cs.manchester.ac.uk/people/harper/
> phpicalendar/week.php
>
> My Diary (Subscribe): http://hcw.cs.manchester.ac.uk/diaries/harper/
> SimonHarper.ics
>
>
>
>
>
--
Charles McCathieNevile Opera Software, Standards Group
je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals Try Opera: http://www.opera.com
Received on Saturday, 25 April 2009 13:09:23 UTC