On Fri, 2007-02-02 at 17:01 -0500, Christian Montoya wrote: > On 2/2/07, Mark Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > miden wrote: > > > Interesting letter on "The Register" WRT accessiblity: > > > > > > "...it's very hard to see why the tiny amount of forethought website > > > authors could show toward accessibility in the very beginning is so > > > terribly absent." > > > > > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/02/02/letters_0202/ > > > > > > And that's really the key point I was trying to make when I started this > > thread (which, as Russ pointed out, has morphed considerably). > > > > Too many 'designers' regard accessibility as something you *do* to your > > site *after* you've developed its visual glory, with consequent > > compromises, and text-based alternatives. It should be, instead, a > > factor that influences your design choices from the beginning, sort of > > "given these parameters, how do we get the effect we want" which is a > > more sensible (and usually cheaper) option. Validate your test models > > before polishing and you're more than halfway to creating a site that > > satisfies on both criteria. > > Now I'm just compelled to mention Faust - Flash AUgmenting STandards. > http://blog.space150.com/2007/1/11/faust-flash-augmenting-standards > > A great example of Faust in practice: > http://www.ivyhotel.com/ >
Beautiful site - took 1 1/2 to 2 minutes for some pages to load completely on dialup but everything 'important' was available almost immediately. Great site and wasn't bothered by any ugly 'you need flash' notices (why do some/so many designers tolerate having their work marred by those notices when they could do something like this. Great stuff. -m ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *******************************************************************
