WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Bridge page wording

for

From: HAA
Date: Jun 23, 2005 9:15AM

I dont see anything wrong with the wording Christian. Simple, but explanatary.

At 14:10 23/06/2005, you wrote:
>We have a client that has a Flash version and an HTML version of the
>same site. The Flash version will be by its very nature not accessible
>to all (marketing speak, games, loads of moving sliding and bouncing
>bits) and is not meant to be. Both versions have the same data, and
>get generated from one source. As it stands now, they automatically
>send Flash users to the singing and dancing version, which is clearly
>a bad idea. I proposed a bridge page to let the visitor choose.
>
>What are your thoughts on the wording, or is there any better version?
>
>
>Welcome to XYZ
>
>We try to give our visitors the best experience possible, but we are
>restricted by the technology of the web. We also realise that our
>visitors access the web differently.
>
>This diversity can mean that the needs or expectations of one group
>might interfere with those of the other.
>
>Therefore we give you the choice and offer two different versions of
>the site. Both have the same information, they only differ in their
>form of delivery.
>
>The traditional version relies on HTML and traditional web
>technologies to deliver the information fast and easy.
>
>The enhanced version uses Flash, requires a modern browser and can not
>be used without a mouse. If you have Flash enabled and you can use a
>mouse then this version will make your visit a lot more enjoyable.
>
>Please choose your desired version:
>
>Traditional
>
>Enhanced
>
> |_| Remember my choice and don't show this page the next time
>
>--
>Chris Heilmann
>Blog: http://www.wait-till-i.com
>Writing: http://icant.co.uk/
>Binaries: http://www.onlinetools.org/
>
>
>