James Jeffery wrote:
However, if
you want see an example where prestige is also crucial, but the designer
  has use compliant methods and passed 508 validation (at least) see:

                         http://www.fosterandpartners

    .com/Practice/Default.aspx



I dont mean to pick on this website, but from looking at the source i can already
see a few minor faults. Maybe there is a purpose, i dont know. But the
navigation links should be within a list. There is an empty div for the divider,
there are other methods to do the same thing.

Anyway taking this back on topic. Ive seen a number of great replies to
this message, its made me think a little more and before i write this article i best
get back to the drawing board with some hard facts.

And back to the point regarding laws, i cant see how they would create
and major limitations, a law to say that a website must be accessible and
follow the guidelines set wouldn't hold much back. Or some sort of convention so that disabled users can quickly find there way to the accessible pages.

I will have a good hard think about this over the next day or so.

Thanks All.



On 8/15/07, *Designer* < [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:


    >Frank Palinkas wrote:
      >
                    > IMHO I would like to add one important factor to
    this. Money.


    I would like to throw a spanner in the works here. There are cases
    where
    a client is as interested in PRESTIGE  as he is in money. See, for
    example:

                            http://www.habitat.co.uk/uk/main_uk.htm

    as a case where prestige/image is crucial to the
    business.  However, if
    you want see an example where prestige is also crucial, but the
    designer
      has use compliant methods and passed 508 validation (at least) see:

                            
http://www.fosterandpartners.com/Practice/Default.aspx
    <http://www.fosterandpartners.com/Practice/Default.aspx>

    An excellent site!  It is interesting to note that, 12 months ago,
    this
    site was Flash, with a poor html version as second choice. This is no
    longer necessary. Inspirational work!

    My point is that the client shouldn't need to know anything about the
    inner cogs and wheels. An experienced  designer <em>should <em> be
    able
    to give the client whatever he wants and (although often difficult and
    challenging) he can do this without sacrificing standards or
    accessibility.

    --
    Bob

    www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk <http://www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk>



    *******************************************************************
    List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
    Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
    Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
    <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
    *******************************************************************



*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
Interesting that http://www.fosterandpartners.com/Practice/Default.aspx page passes the HTML validation but fails the CSS validation as provided by the W3C. The other pages on the site Also fail validation on HTML as well. I have yet to see a web page that is fully compliant with HTML,CSS,WAI that was appealing to the eyes let alone done with Macromedia Flash.


*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************

Reply via email to