At 02:31 PM 5/3/03 +0100, Elsi wrote: > >A much better effort for our organization would be to start proposing >accessibility standards. Elsi, Do you mean things like ALT tags and other such HTML / XML items that assist the blind and/or otherwise handicapped? Tim

At 09:52 AM 5/3/2003 -0400, Tim Stowell wrote: >At 02:31 PM 5/3/03 +0100, Elsi wrote: > > > >A much better effort for our organization would be to start proposing > >accessibility standards. > >Elsi, > >Do you mean things like ALT tags and other such HTML / XML items that >assist the blind and/or otherwise handicapped? Definitely the ALT tags. And meaningful ALT tags. For example if there is a scanned image of a will, one should use the LONGDESC with a full transcript of the contents, not just an ALT label saying "Will of George Peters" -- or link to the transcript. In other words, don't restrict content because of a handicap. But there are a ton of other things that need to be done to enable our pages to be used by ALL, whether able-bodied or not: * Only using tables for tabular data and not for layout/appearance. Screen readers have a very hard time dealing with table-based layouts. * Making sure that font choices can be overridden by the user as desired/necessary. Those with limited vision (maybe even just an elderly person) may need to enlarge fonts in order to read the text. * Making sure that our pages can be navigated entirely by keyboard and not require a mouse. (And removing the mousey language such as "click here".) * Making sure that pages will print properly. Some accessibility tools use a 'printed' view of the page. * Ensuring that music doesn't automatically play. A deaf person might not know that the speakers are turned up to full volume & thus disturb someone nearby. * Ensuring that pages display legibly (if not as attractively) on WebTV and small monitors (800x600 for example). The W3C has guidelines posted at http://www.w3.org/WAI/ You can validate your pages using Bobby at http://bobby.watchfire.com/bobby/html/en/index.jsp Elsi