Linking to inaccessible sites?

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Leif K-Brooks, Nov 14, 2003.

  1. What should I do when linking to an inaccessible site (99% of the web)?
    Put a warning notice? Just link it? Not put the link at all?
     
    Leif K-Brooks, Nov 14, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Leif K-Brooks wrote:
    > What should I do when linking to an inaccessible site (99% of the
    > web)?


    inaccessible or not accessible? hang on, that's no better is it?
    inaccessible as in 404 for example, or inaccessible as in common-sense
    failure to markup the document properly?

    > Put a warning notice? Just link it? Not put the link at all?


    answer has to depend on circumstance.

    --
    William Tasso - http://WilliamTasso.com
     
    William Tasso, Nov 14, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. William Tasso wrote:

    > inaccessible or not accessible? hang on, that's no better is it?
    > inaccessible as in 404 for example, or inaccessible as in common-sense
    > failure to markup the document properly?


    Inaccessible as in tables for layout, no or little structural markup,
    images with no alternate text, etc.
     
    Leif K-Brooks, Nov 14, 2003
    #3
  4. Leif K-Brooks

    Adrienne Guest

    Gazing into my crystal ball I observed Leif K-Brooks
    <> writing in news:h9dtb.881$Ob3.886284
    @monger.newsread.com:

    > William Tasso wrote:
    >
    >> inaccessible or not accessible? hang on, that's no better is it?
    >> inaccessible as in 404 for example, or inaccessible as in common-sense
    >> failure to markup the document properly?

    >
    > Inaccessible as in tables for layout, no or little structural markup,
    > images with no alternate text, etc.


    Are they linking to you? If they are, do they are relative keywords in the
    link back to you, and what, if any, is their Google PR? There are rumors
    that linking out to sites with low or no PR can drain your PR. I don't know
    if that's something important to you or not.

    --
    Adrienne Boswell
    Please respond to the group so others can share
    http://www.arbpen.com
     
    Adrienne, Nov 14, 2003
    #4
  5. Leif K-Brooks <> wrote:

    > Inaccessible as in tables for layout, no or little structural markup,
    > images with no alternate text, etc.


    So you mean accessibility as defined by WAI ( http://www.w3.org/ ).
    (See also the "business guide" http://www.diffuse.org/accessibility.html )
    Note that tables for layout do not imply inaccessibility per se,
    and not all structural markup is equally important - e.g. <p> and <h2> are
    essential whereas <abbr> or longdesc is mostly an exercise in futility.

    Regarding to your original question, all of the alternatives you mention are
    adequate in certain situations:
    a) Put a warning notice?
    Yes, if it's especially inaccessible and you can help people by
    giving useful advice, e.g. "it's best to disable JavaScript before
    entering this site" or "the page is best viewed without images" or
    "the page contains flashing effects".
    b) Just link it?
    In most cases, yes. Since most pages are more or less inaccessible,
    people know what to expect.
    c) Not put the link at all?
    The right choice at least in cases where a more accessible site with
    sufficiently equivalent content can be found, or the content is not
    very relevant, or the site is really a mess. You need to weigh
    users' problems with the expectable gain.

    --
    Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
    Pages about Web authoring: http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/www.html
     
    Jukka K. Korpela, Nov 14, 2003
    #5
  6. Leif K-Brooks

    JT Guest

    "Leif K-Brooks" wrote:
    > What should I do when linking to an inaccessible site (99% of the web)?
    > Put a warning notice? Just link it? Not put the link at all?


    I would not bother with any links Leif, as I'm sure the 99% would not want
    to be associated with yours.
     
    JT, Nov 14, 2003
    #6
  7. Leif K-Brooks

    jake Guest

    In message <h9dtb.881$>, Leif K-Brooks
    <> writes
    >William Tasso wrote:
    >
    >> inaccessible or not accessible? hang on, that's no better is it?
    >> inaccessible as in 404 for example, or inaccessible as in common-sense
    >> failure to markup the document properly?

    >
    >Inaccessible as in tables for layout, no or little structural markup,
    >images with no alternate text, etc.


    None of these things on their own (or together, for that matter)
    necessarily makes the site inaccessible.

    Inappropriate use of Java, Javascript, Shockwave,etc. -- now that can be
    'inaccessible' ;-)

    regards.
    --
    Jake
     
    jake, Nov 15, 2003
    #7
  8. Leif K-Brooks

    JT Guest

    "Leif K-Brooks" WROTE:
    > What should I do when linking to an inaccessible site (99% of the web)?
    > Put a warning notice? Just link it? Not put the link at all?


    I would not bother linking to the 99% Leif, as I'm sure the 99% would in no
    way wish to be associated with your site.
     
    JT, Nov 15, 2003
    #8
  9. Leif K-Brooks

    Isofarro Guest

    jake wrote:

    > In message <h9dtb.881$>, Leif K-Brooks
    > <> writes
    >>Inaccessible as in tables for layout, no or little structural markup,
    >>images with no alternate text, etc.

    >
    > None of these things on their own (or together, for that matter)
    > necessarily makes the site inaccessible.


    You don't have any difficulty finding the "Checkout" or "Shopping Basket"
    link on amazon.co.uk? That's _just_ a missing alt text.

    If you don't have difficulty with that - how do you do it with a speech
    browser?


    --
    Iso.
    FAQs: http://html-faq.com http://alt-html.org http://allmyfaqs.com/
    Recommended Hosting: http://www.affordablehost.com/
    Web Design Tutorial: http://www.sitepoint.com/article/1010
     
    Isofarro, Nov 15, 2003
    #9
  10. Leif K-Brooks

    Isofarro Guest

    Leif K-Brooks wrote:

    > What should I do when linking to an inaccessible site (99% of the web)?
    > Put a warning notice? Just link it? Not put the link at all?


    Link to it through something like Nick Kew's mod_accessibility? (I hesitate
    to mention the BBC's Betsie). Although remember that a script can't improve
    the accessibility by adding missing things, but it can remove certain
    inaccessibility.


    --
    Iso.
    FAQs: http://html-faq.com http://alt-html.org http://allmyfaqs.com/
    Recommended Hosting: http://www.affordablehost.com/
    Web Design Tutorial: http://www.sitepoint.com/article/1010
     
    Isofarro, Nov 15, 2003
    #10
  11. Leif K-Brooks

    jake Guest

    In message <>, Isofarro
    <> writes
    >jake wrote:
    >
    >> In message <h9dtb.881$>, Leif K-Brooks
    >> <> writes
    >>>Inaccessible as in tables for layout, no or little structural markup,
    >>>images with no alternate text, etc.

    >>
    >> None of these things on their own (or together, for that matter)
    >> necessarily makes the site inaccessible.

    >
    >You don't have any difficulty finding the "Checkout" or "Shopping Basket"
    >link on amazon.co.uk? That's _just_ a missing alt text.
    >
    >If you don't have difficulty with that - how do you do it with a speech
    >browser?
    >
    >

    They key word in my comment is 'necessarily'.

    The particular example that you quote is one of inaccessibility.
    However, there are plenty of examples where the lack of suitable
    alternative text, although less than ideal, does not in itself make the
    site inaccessible.

    Ditto for tables-based layout and use of frames.

    regards.
    --
    Jake
     
    jake, Nov 15, 2003
    #11
  12. Leif K-Brooks

    Whitecrest Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > If you don't have difficulty with that - how do you do it with a speech
    > browser?


    I don't, I do it with IE and it works great. I guess a blind person
    could call or ask a sighted person if they could help.

    I am sorry you have bad vision, but please don't make the rest of the
    world suffer because you have a physical disability. (bla bla bla,
    insert PC bullshit here)

    --
    Whitecrest Entertainment
    www.whitecrestent.com
     
    Whitecrest, Nov 15, 2003
    #12
  13. Leif K-Brooks

    Eric Bohlman Guest

    Joel Shepherd <> wrote in
    news:LZAtb.2346$:

    > Whitecrest wrote:
    >> I am sorry you have bad vision, but please don't make the rest of
    >> the world suffer because you have a physical disability.

    >
    > <BOGGLE> What suffering is caused by decent alt text?!


    The suffering of the author having to put in a little bit of extra effort,
    apparently. I've got this sort of old-fashioned belief that if it can't be
    done without cutting corners, it's not worth doing, but then what do I
    know?

    The Perl community has the concepts of "true Lazyness" and "false
    Lazyness." The virtue of True Lazyness involves possibly putting in a
    little bit of extra effort on one's own part in order to minimize the
    effort that everybody else has to put in. The vice of False Lazyness
    involves offloading a little bit of your own effort to thousands (at least)
    of other people, thus massively increasing the total amount of effort
    required.

    Creating accessible pages is True Lazyness. Creating inaccessible pages is
    False Lazyness. The OP talked about a blind user encountering an
    inaccessible page and needing to call the organization responsible for the
    page (what if that contact information isn't accessible) or bringing in a
    sighted person to read it. If he does either, right away he's put in more
    effort than it would take for the author to have made the page accessible.
    Even if he's the only one who has to put in that effort. If that isn't
    False Lazyness, I don't know what is.

    A good way to tell whether you're being Truly Lazy or Falsely Lazy is to
    ask yourself "would I make this decision if I had to offer 24/7/365 tech
    support for my creation?" Kind of a milder version of the (possibly
    apocryphal) old Roman requirement that the engineer who designed a bridge
    had to stand underneath it on the day it was opened.
     
    Eric Bohlman, Nov 16, 2003
    #13
  14. Leif K-Brooks

    Nico Schuyt Guest

    Eric Bohlman wrote:
    > .......
    > A good way to tell whether you're being Truly Lazy or Falsely Lazy is
    > to ask yourself "would I make this decision if I had to offer
    > 24/7/365 tech support for my creation?"


    Great definition!
    Nico
     
    Nico Schuyt, Nov 16, 2003
    #14
  15. Leif K-Brooks

    Whitecrest Guest

    In article <LZAtb.2346$>,
    says...
    > >> If you don't have difficulty with that - how do you do it with a
    > >> speech browser?

    > > I don't, I do it with IE and it works great.

    > Really? Even when the image server is down? That's a helluva browser.
    > Clients that don't support images are one reason for decent alt text.
    > There are others having nothing to do with the client at all.
    > <BOGGLE> What suffering is caused by decent alt text?!


    But I plead with you, think about the retarded and slow people that surf
    the web? What about them? Shouldn't every site be required to use
    little words for the retards can enjoy the web?

    That is the point I am making, not if alt text is easy to ad or not. PC
    is stupid especially when applied to something as huge as the web. It
    will never work. and should NEVER be forced on anyone. It is the
    companies choice if they want to support it or not.

    --
    Whitecrest Entertainment
    www.whitecrestent.com
     
    Whitecrest, Nov 16, 2003
    #15
  16. Whitecrest wrote:

    > But I plead with you, think about the retarded and slow people that surf
    > the web? What about them? Shouldn't every site be required to use
    > little words for the retards can enjoy the web?


    There's a difference between not understanding the subject and not being
    able to read the discussion.

    If I want to have a discussion of art, I'll go right ahead. I'm sorry
    that a blind person won't be able to understand most of it, but that
    isn't my fault. I will try to make the website discussing the art
    accessible to everyone, but the information may not be understandable to
    everyone.

    > That is the point I am making, not if alt text is easy to ad or not. PC
    > is stupid especially when applied to something as huge as the web. It
    > will never work. and should NEVER be forced on anyone. It is the
    > companies choice if they want to support it or not.


    It's also my choice if I want to respectfully ask you to keep the web
    accessible to everyone.
     
    Leif K-Brooks, Nov 16, 2003
    #16
  17. Whitecrest wrote:
    > In article <LZAtb.2346$>,
    > says...
    >> <BOGGLE> What suffering is caused by decent alt text?!

    >
    > But I plead with you, think about the retarded and slow people that
    > surf the web? What about them? Shouldn't every site be required
    > to use little words for the retards can enjoy the web?


    As another poster pointed out, you're confusing the difference between
    not being able to comprehend the information given, and not being able
    to access that information at all.

    > That is the point I am making, not if alt text is easy to ad or
    > not.


    Really?

    "I am sorry you have bad vision, but please don't make the rest of the
    world suffer because you have a physical disability."

    So, again, what world-wide suffering is caused by decent alt text?

    --
    Joel.
     
    Joel Shepherd, Nov 16, 2003
    #17
  18. Leif K-Brooks

    Whitecrest Guest

    In article <6ZLtb.994$>,
    says...
    > It's also my choice if I want to respectfully ask you to keep the web
    > accessible to everyone.


    And mine to say, I don't feel it is needed.

    --
    Whitecrest Entertainment
    www.whitecrestent.com
     
    Whitecrest, Nov 17, 2003
    #18
  19. Leif K-Brooks

    Whitecrest Guest

    In article <TYPtb.2402$>,
    says...
    > > That is the point I am making, not if alt text is easy to ad or
    > > not.

    > Really?
    > "I am sorry you have bad vision, but please don't make the rest of the
    > world suffer because you have a physical disability."


    Why does the rest of the world suffer if you have alt text? Go back and
    re-read. I am not stating if it is EASY or NOT, but rather that it (as
    well as other things) should not be REQUIRED.

    I feel it is up to the client. Pretty simple, you feel differently. I
    personally almost always put them there. But I feel there is nothing
    wrong with the site if I don't put them there. And yes, I understand
    someone with a reader will not know what is there. And I know this
    could cause me to loose off of the blind people and people that use
    linx.

    But here is the kicker. Sometimes, I don't care. And that is ok.

    > So, again, what world-wide suffering is caused by decent alt text?


    Now that you understand what I said, you see that what you said makes
    little sense at all.

    --
    Whitecrest Entertainment
    www.whitecrestent.com
     
    Whitecrest, Nov 17, 2003
    #19
  20. Whitecrest wrote:
    > In article <TYPtb.2402$>,
    > says...
    >
    >> So, again, what world-wide suffering is caused by decent alt
    >> text?

    >
    > Now that you understand what I said, you see that what you said
    > makes little sense at all.


    I understood what you said before. Please don't make it sound like I'm
    making little sense: *you're* the one who equated accessibility with
    worldwide suffering.

    --
    Joel.
     
    Joel Shepherd, Nov 17, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Kevin Buchan
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    506
    Eric Lawrence [MSFT]
    Feb 20, 2004
  2. Stefan Caliandro
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    670
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty
    Feb 14, 2005
  3. Jasbird

    Sites about web-sites ?

    Jasbird, Sep 12, 2006, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    423
  4. imx
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    846
  5. Yitzak

    2 sites or not 2 sites

    Yitzak, Mar 7, 2009, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    459
    Andrew Morton
    Mar 10, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page