E-mail List Archives

Re: Intro and question

for

From: Mary Martinson Grossnickle, Martinson Training
Date: Jun 23, 2004 2:00PM


Another caution in developing a separate version is that many times the
separate version is developed for screen reader users. This is not the only
disability community who use the web. So a separate "accessible" site might
not be truly accessible, it could end up just being a screen reader version.
The site might still be inaccessible for other audiences.

A resource which might help, especially if you need to justify your decision
*not* to maintain two sites, is "Myth: Just Add a Text-Only Version" in
"Understanding Web Accessibility" in the book "Constructing Accessible
Websites."

"Constructing Accessible Websites" by Jim Thatcher, Cynthia Waddell,
Shawn Henry, Sarah Swierenga, Mark Urban, Michael Burks, Paul Bohman,
Publisher: APress; Reprint edition (July 14, 2003), ISBN: 1590591488

-----Original Message-----
From: jill.lenz [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ]
Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2004 11:34 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Intro and question



From another developer's perspective on maintaining two versions . . .
been there, done that. Don't do it.

Follow Michael's advice of using XHTML/CSS. It's the way to go these
days. There's lots of good tutorials out there on the subject.

michael wrote:

> One a side note (from a developer's perspective) if you have two separate
> sites, it is just going to take you twice the amount of time to maintain
and
> twice the amount of chance of error (updated page on main site but not the
> secondary site etc.)
>
> I honestly don't see why you would have a problem in developing a visually
> pleasing site that is also steadfast accessible especially if you use the
> right tools and plan ahead. With the majority of the browsers support for
> and rendering of XHTML/CSS being stronger, you will be able to keep the
> presentation separate from content pretty well which in turn allows you to
> manipulate the visual side via CSS and create semantically correct content
> which should transport well within both visual browsers and text based
> browsers and readers.
>
> HTH with giving you some other viewpoints on what you will face when and
if
> you choose two separate sites. And apologies for going a bit off topic on
> your question.
>
> Michael Goddard
> Internet Developer/Programmer, CIW
> TDH Marketing &amp; Communications, Inc.
> 8153 Garnet Drive
> Dayton, OH. 45458
> phone: 937.438.3434
> fax: 937.438.3453
> email: <EMAIL REMOVED>
> web: http://www.tdh-marketing.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: honorsgurl [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2004 12:59 PM
> To: WebAIM Discussion List
> Subject: [WebAIM] Intro and question
>
>
>
> Hello,
>
> I've been lurking on this list for a little while and have learned a lot
> from reading your posts. Thanks!
>
> I've done a little web design in the past, but now I'm responsible for
> developing the site for our program at the university, and I'm very
> committed to making the site fully accessible. I have much still to learn
> on this topic.
>
> In considering accessibility, my first thought was to create one
> graphics-intense site (the main site) and one low-graphics site, linking
to
> the accessible site from the main site.
>
> However, in reading some things on the web about this idea, I discovered
> that some people consider this approach demeaning to those who will use
the
> accessible site--sort of as if one population of web users is restricted
to
> using a _back door_ to enter the site. Naturally, I do not want to offend
> or demean anyone who uses our site.
>
> My ultimate goal is to create a single website that satisfies both the
> desire of a visually-oriented population to access a cutting edge website
> and the desire of those who are vision impaired or have other
accessibility
> issues to be able to access the site's content. But that will take me
quite
> awhile to accomplish (if ever!), and I must get this website built as soon
> as possible, as the current site is a disaster from many standpoints, not
> the least of which is utter inaccessibility.
>
> Can anyone give me some insight as to the feelings of the disabled web
> community about separate, accessible sites? Does this population really
> feel demeaned when using these sites? Would you advise that I avoid the
> two-site approach?
>
> Thank you in advance for any input!
>
> Beth Hanes
> Office Manager
> University Honors Program
> MSC06 3890
> 1 University of New Mexico
> Albuquerque, NM 87131-0001
> (505) 277-4213
> http://www.unm.edu/~honors
>
> ----
> To subscribe or unsubscribe, visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
>
> ----
> To subscribe or unsubscribe, visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/

--
Jill Lenz
College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences
1601 Campus Delivery
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, CO 80523-1601

Office of the Dean - Instructional Technology
http://www.cvmbs.colostate.edu/intech/lab/
Office: Physiology 109
InTech Lab: Physiology 101
voice: 970-491-6585
fax: 970-491-2250
<EMAIL REMOVED>

----
To subscribe or unsubscribe, visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/