- From: Håkon Wium Lie <howcome@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2002 00:53:38 +0200
- To: "Ian Tindale" <ian_tindale@yahoo.co.uk>
- Cc: <www-style@w3.org>
Also sprach Ian Tindale:
> > I'm a speech browser on the web. I've been sent an XSL-FO "document".
> > How do I return to the source?
[..]
> I'd have thought it would be more logical to sort out what kind of
> UA you are - HTML browser, XML 'browser', television, WAP device,
> speaky thing, Braille terminal, synthesizer, teapot etc, and send
> you precisely the kind of stuff you'll be happy with.
Yes, this is a better idea. What's the chance of the average webmaster
providing XSLT scripts for all the devices you list above given that
only 3.7% of W3C member organizations use valid HTML on their home
page [1]?
[1] http://www.markokarppinen.com/20020822.html
-h&kon
Håkon Wium Lie cto °þe®ª
howcome@opera.com http://people.opera.com/howcome
Aural properties to my mind belong in a stylesheet model of their own, rather than being tucked away in the corner of a visual spec, where they've more chance of being ignored than used. Thus, if you're a speech browser, you'll be sent a differently transformed set of objects, and hopefully a different 'style' sheet also. Neither of which would be applicable to a visual device, but that eventuality would never happen would it.
>
> Rather than letting accessibility in a little bit, like giving a concession 'oh, here, have this dusty corner of the style sheet spec', why not have entire style sheet modes for different sensory environments, and deliver appropriately?
>
> Ian Tindale
>
Received on Thursday, 5 September 2002 19:06:40 UTC