On Thu, 2002-02-21 at 13:28, Damien Morton wrote:
From: Dale Newfield [mailto:dale@newfield.org] It only works with graphical browsers.
This is true. We are in the 21st century now. Expecting a graphical client isnt such a huge leap of faith, unless we allow ourselves to be guided by recidivist or luddite lynx users and their ilk.
You haven't been following this, have you...
Chuq Vos Rospach wrote yesterday in response to Dale's point:-
This is a very good point. I mentioned ADA compliance yesterday. To be ADA compliant, if you rendered the e-mail address as a graphic, you'd also have to put the text into the ALT tag. Which would enable it for lynx and sight-limited solutions -- and make putting into a graphic kinda meaningless. So you can't use this approach unless you want to ignore the ADA and lock out your blind users from those functions.
I'm not willing to make that tradeoff. While I'm not going to live or die on the ADA compliance issue, I think it's important to keep it in mind because it forces us to focus on more than the "easy" case or the "geek" case and worry about solutions that work across the spectrum of users, from the AOL newbie to Jay. We can't solve problems just for Jay, or just for Newbies, we have to find a solution that works as well as possible for as many of those groups as possible. ADA compliance is a useful strawman that keeps us focussed away from "I want it this way, so that's the right way".
plus enforcing a minimum browser standard (other than minimal text/html) is going to hit deep water with the various PDAs, phones, WAP and other stuff that almost has real browsers on.
And insulting lynx users isn't a way to increase your expected life span. Go do something less controversial like arguing the advantages of vi in the emacs news groups.
Nigel.
-- [ Nigel Metheringham Nigel.Metheringham@InTechnology.co.uk ] [ Phone: +44 1423 850000 Fax +44 1423 858866 ] [ - Comments in this message are my own and not ITO opinion/policy - ]