Does WCAG 1.0 say alternate interfaces are a "last resort"?

At 12:03 PM 11/2/2000 , William Loughborough wrote:
 > Your "...the absurd WCAG 1.0 statement that alternate
 > interfaces are a 'last resort'." is not even remotely close
 > to what the guideline actually says, which is "...Where it is
 > not possible to use a W3C technology, or doing so results in
 > material that does not transform gracefully, provide an
 > alternative version of the content that is accessible." Now, I
 > don't mean this very pejoratively but to use your phrase in
 > this connection is demagoguery. It may be that many of us
 > interpret this to mean it's a "last resort" but that's not
 > justification for calling it a WCAG "statement". 

Here is one WCAG statement:

If, after best efforts, you cannot create an accessible page,
provide a link to an alternative page that uses W3C technologies,
is accessible, has equivalent information (or functionality), and
is updated as often as the inaccessible (original) page.

This is checkpoint 11.4 in WCAG 1.0.  The "after best efforts"
phrase is a link, to this text which immediately follows 11.4:

Note. Content developers should only resort to alternative pages
when other solutions fail because alternative pages are generally
updated less often than "primary" pages. An out-of-date page may
be as frustrating as one that is inaccessible since, in both cases,
the information presented on the original page is unavailable.
Automatically generating alternative pages may lead to more
frequent updates, but content developers must still be careful to
ensure that generated pages always make sense, and that users are
able to navigate a site by following links on primary pages,
alternative pages, or both. Before resorting to an alternative
page, reconsider the design of the original page; making it
accessible is likely to improve it for all users.


I maintain that it is pretty clear that WCAG 1.0 considers a
single-interface approach to be superior to multiple interfaces,
and the guideline is written exactly to suggest that using
multiple interfaces should be done as a "last resort" and not
as a first solution.  Note the use of "only resort...when other
solutions fail..."; note the use of "before resorting."

I find it very hard to believe that we are looking at the same
version of WCAG 1.0 if you are claiming that it does not
suggest alternate interfaces as a "last resort."

--Kynn

-- 
Kynn Bartlett  <kynn@idyllmtn.com>                    http://kynn.com/
Director of Accessibility, Edapta               http://www.edapta.com/
Chief Technologist, Idyll Mountain Internet   http://www.idyllmtn.com/
AWARE Center Director                      http://www.awarecenter.org/
What's on my bookshelf?                         http://kynn.com/books/

Received on Thursday, 2 November 2000 15:31:34 UTC