On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 1:31 AM, Andreas Boehmer [Addictive Media]
aboeh...@addictivemedia.com.au wrote:
I went through WCAG 1 and WCAG 2, and I expected an appropriate guideline
to
show up under Priority 1 (or Level A), but nothing. Or am I missing
something in the obscure wording of the
On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 1:31 AM, Andreas Boehmer [Addictive Media]
aboeh...@addictivemedia.com.au wrote:
I went through WCAG 1 and WCAG 2, and I expected an appropriate
guideline to
show up under Priority 1 (or Level A), but nothing. Or am I
missing
something in the obscure
A user's choice of technology is not an accessibility issue. If people want
to view content on the web, they have to make sure they are using suitable
hardware and software - using a 10-year-old browser doesn't qualify, IMO.
Should I be able to view a site on my Commodore 64?
Do they have
I tend to follow a hierarchy of needs.
At the most basic level, the text needs to be correctly rendered.
This implies that a web site may be dependant on specific versions of
operating systems or browsers. This is the reality of text layout/font
rendering systems.
In theory supporting
Andreas Boehmer [Addictive Media] wrote:
I mean: to be accessible the site doesn't necessarily have to look
great, but at least the content should show up in all browsers, even the old
ones, right?
That would mark any site that used shared webhosting (i.e. most
websites) as inaccessible since
Andreas Boehmer [Addictive Media]
to be accessible the site doesn't necessarily have to look great, but
at least the content should show up in all browsers, even the old ones,
right?
Well, just talking WCAG 2, the requirement would be to use
accessibility-supported technologies (see
On Apr 8, 2009, at 8:12 AM, David Dorward wrote:
A line needs to be drawn somewhere. The problem is that nobody can
really seem to agree on where a reasonable place to draw it is.
Perhaps this is the very reason why accessibility still going nowhere
and that we are still the .1 %
On 2009/04/08 07:16 (GMT+0100) Matthew Pennell composed:
A user's choice of technology is not an accessibility issue. If people want
to view content on the web, they have to make sure they are using suitable
hardware and software - using a 10-year-old browser doesn't qualify, IMO.
The
