Designer wrote: > By that term ["purely visual site"] I meant a site which > has very little (if any) text. Thank you for the example but I don't understand what is purely visual about this site. If the alt text for images was written correctly, a blind person using a screen reader or someone who turned image rendering off in the browser, would still get information from this site.
The same would apply if 100% of the content on the site were made up of images. X/HTML is not a visual technology. So long as Web pages are written in X/HTML according to specification, there shouldn't be such a things as a "purely visual site". Regards, -Vlad http://xhtml.com -------- Original Message -------- From: Designer Date: 2007-08-31 6:50 AM > Vlad Alexander (XStandard) wrote: > >> I don't know what is a "purely visual site". Can you please provide an >> example? >> >> Regards, >> -Vlad > > Hi Vlad, > > By that term I meant a site which has very little (if any) text. See > www.kernowimages.co.uk for a (not perfect :-) example. The content of > the site is visual as opposed to literal. There are a lot of such sites > around. > > HTH, > ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *******************************************************************
