Two big bits of news for little me...
Home / News & Resources / Two big bits of news for little me...
Firstly:
http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/articlenews.aspx?type=internetNews&storyID=2007-01-19T161023Z_01_L1851821_RTRIDST_0_OUKIN-UK-BRITAIN-TOOLBAR.XML&WTmodLoc=TechInternet-C1-Headline-10
[BIG edit : Please note that the orginal version of the article from Reuters has been corrected since Redux veiwed it.]
And secondly:
http://viki.redirectme.net
I made both, so any questions, you know who to blame/ask. Though VIKI is built on Loband, made by Aidworld.
Thoughts?
(all very exciting to see my stuff in the news)
_________________
creator of Talklets
Talklets ,
Last edited by Phil Teare on 22 Jan 2007 05:17 pm; edited 3 times in total
Share: 
| Phil Teare wrote: |
| Firstly:
today.reuters.co.uk/news/articlenews.aspx?type=internetNews&storyID=2007-01-19T092824Z_01_L1851821_RTRIDST_0_OUKIN-UK-BRITAIN-TOOLBAR.XML&WTmodLoc=TechInternet-C4-Internet-2 |
from the article
| Quote: |
|
"It's the silver bullet," IMRG's Chief Executive James Roper told Reuters. "Put this little button on your site and suddenly you are legal." |
that's such a generalised and fundamentally inaccurate statement, it makes me shake my head in disbelief.
_________________
Patrick H. Lauke / webmaster / University of Salford
co-lead: WaSP Accesibility Task Force
take it to the streets ... WaSP Street Team
personal: splintered | photographia | redux
co-author: Web Accessibility - Web Standards and Regulatory Compliance
Last edited by redux on 19 Jan 2007 04:47 pm; edited 1 time in total
Share:
Considering the first thing I saw when opening the Reuters site suddenly had a Flash advert for Land Rover appear over it I think Reuters should read their own stories and act accordingly.
Phil, I get a 404 on your second link
_________________
Mike Abbott
Accessible to everyone
Share:
pooo
Anyone else get it? or see it?
What Browser are you useing Mikea? Does this work:
http://81.149.150.32:8080/...
http://81.149.150.32:8080/...
Chrs
_________________
creator of Talklets
Talklets ,
Last edited by Phil Teare on 19 Jan 2007 07:37 pm; edited 2 times in total
Share:
BIG UPDATE!
Hows it feel to get something changed on Reuters Redux:
http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/articlenews.aspx?type=internetNews&storyID=2007-01-19T161023Z_01_L1851821_RTRIDST_0_OUKIN-UK-BRITAIN-TOOLBAR.XML&WTmodLoc=TechInternet-C1-Headline-10
_________________
creator of Talklets
Talklets ,
Share:
good stuff 
_________________
Patrick H. Lauke / webmaster / University of Salford
co-lead: WaSP Accesibility Task Force
take it to the streets ... WaSP Street Team
personal: splintered | photographia | redux
co-author: Web Accessibility - Web Standards and Regulatory Compliance
Share:
I'm beginning to see why Jeremy's point about accessibility language is vital.
Defining accessibility as "barrier free" might help to prevent people adding things onto a site when they haven't got the basics right.
_________________
Nomensa / AlastairC
Share:
Yes.
Although I don't quite buy his argument:
| Quote: |
| In English, it’s relatively easy to qualify the word “accessible.” We can talk about sites being “quite accessible”, “fairly accessible”, or “very accessible”. But if you define accessibility as a lack of obstacles, then as long as a single obstacle remains in place it’s hard to use the word “barrierefrei” as an adjective. The term is too binary; black or white; yes or no.
|
Relatively Barrier Free, would be soon common place terminology for a site thats tried, but in practice, failed...
_________________
creator of Talklets
Talklets ,
Share:
"separation of content and presentation are vital"
True, but can they be seperated post rendering?
Its a LOT easier if folk design well first. And while we can't see a good argument AGAINST designing content and presentation seperately, I'm finding it more and more difficult to find a single site that does this perfectly, anywhere on the Web. So a tool that can help remove the one from the other could be useful... I hope.
Being devils advocate, and underlining that we're far from saying we should give up on accessible design, quite the contary, I'd say something like this could be the starter drug for many accessibility virgins. As 'twere. Instead of being confronted with masses of inpenitrable standards and guidelines re design, start by running your site through something like this, and then you can 'see' what needs work more easily. If of course, your site already exists, and you've not already designed it well...
But thats a long way from our focus, which is allowing install free access to the web, by those who can't install screen readers, but need them. Of which there are many.
_________________
creator of Talklets
Talklets ,
Share:
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT
You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum