- 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