E-mail List Archives
Re: Conforming alternate version
From: glen walker
Date: Jan 14, 2022 9:33AM
- Next message: Paul Rayius: "Re: Conforming alternate version"
- Previous message: Paul Rayius: "Re: Conforming alternate version"
- Next message in Thread: Paul Rayius: "Re: Conforming alternate version"
- Previous message in Thread: Paul Rayius: "Re: Conforming alternate version"
- View all messages in this Thread
Hi Paul, where are you seeing that? As posted earlier, there are a list of
4 things that are required for a conforming alternative version. Point 4.1
says:
the conforming version can be reached *from* the non-conforming page via an
accessibility-supported mechanism
That's saying the opposite of what you're saying.
Point 4.2 says what you're saying:
the non-conforming version can only be reached from the conforming version
The three points under #4 says at least one of the sub-points is true. So
it's possible to have the non-accessible site first and then you navigate
*from* the non-accessible site to the accessible site, as long as that
navigation mechanism is accessible.
I don't think anyone on this list likes conforming alternative versions but
we're just discussing what is officially allowed.
On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 8:58 AM Paul Rayius < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
> Hi all,
> The W3C is pretty clear, when talking about alternate versions, that IF
> this option is chosen, the non-accessible site (or page, etc.) should be
> able to be navigated to *from* the accessible site (or page). Not the
> other way around.
> That might be another thing to consider about going this route.
> Best,
> Paul
>
> Paul Rayius
> Vice-President of Training
> CommonLook
>
>
- Next message: Paul Rayius: "Re: Conforming alternate version"
- Previous message: Paul Rayius: "Re: Conforming alternate version"
- Next message in Thread: Paul Rayius: "Re: Conforming alternate version"
- Previous message in Thread: Paul Rayius: "Re: Conforming alternate version"
- View all messages in this Thread