BLIND-DEV Archives

Development of Adaptive Hardware & Software for the Blind/VI

BLIND-DEV@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Kelly Ford <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
BLIND-DEV: Development of Adaptive Hardware & Software for the Blind/VI" <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 18 Jun 1997 09:16:58 -0700
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (39 lines)
David,



> Kelly, You raise some excellent points.  it might be simpler to have the
> screenreader report "link" where there is an alt tagless link which could
> make it more universal.  as regards frames, I find that the site
> reflecting frames and then putting the content in regular style below or
> using a noframes option can be helpfull.

I would think getting developers of programs like Netscape and Internet
Explorer to put a default phrase for untagged links would have more
universal appeal.  Take a look at what happened before either program
supported any kind of keyboard navigation.  You had the various screen
reader companies coming up with assorted tricks, like the JFW macros, to
attempt to provide keyboard access to links.  You were then left with the
situation of the users of one particular screen reader having things work
one way, at least until the browser changed when the cycle had to start
over.  Having the browser developers take some recognition of the fact
that not everyone can see who uses the software would help.  Microsoft has
started this but untagged links are still a large problem.

I would agree that a noframes option is nice but advocating for it is
probably a bit unrealistic.  It is hard enough getting folks to tag links,
let alone develop another version of the site.  And I personally don't
think frames pose that large of a barrier to accessibility when accessed
with a graphical browser.

Until there are some standards defined I think we are going to have
serious difficulty impacting the accessibility of the web.  When a builder
constructs a building he or she can pull out assorted guidelines which
give fairly precise instructions on what must be done to make something
accessible.  I know of no such universal standard for the web.  The
material at Trace is a quality starting point but, at least in my view,
can hardly be pointed to as something to say if you do this your site will
be accessible.  This is mostly because the first question I as a web
designer would have is which this in Trace's document should I follow.
There are many strategies but few certainties.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2