RE: Browsers

by "Mike Paciello" <paciello(at)webable.com>

 Date:  Wed, 23 Jan 2002 18:52:53 -0500
 To:  "Kukla Fran and Ollie" <weblists2001(at)yahoo.com>,
"aware-techniques" <aware-techniques(at)hwg.org>,
"mlivsey" <mlivsey(at)qwest.com>
 Cc:  "Nicky Danino" <ndanino1(at)uclan.ac.uk>
 In-Reply-To:  yahoo
  todo: View Thread, Original
This is a good strategy. Keep in mind, however, that some organizations
demand that sites work with specific browser versions - regardless of the
'hit' ratio. You may have to reason with management to get them to buy into
your recommendation.

-Mike

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kukla Fran and Ollie [mailto:weblists2001(at)yahoo.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 6:30 PM
> To: aware-techniques; mlivsey
> Cc: Nicky Danino; paciello
> Subject: RE: Browsers
>
>
> Your guiding light should be the accessibility standards, and your server
> stats.
>
> While you may have personal experience with a myriad of browsers, for
> whatever reasons, your site's accessibility should be addressed according
> to standards, and the browsers hitting your site.  After all, what is the
> point testing a site against a minority browser where you have no stats
> that anyone (other than you and a few friends) indicate it is
> being used to
> view your site?
>
> Best you build your site according to the web accessibility standards and
> then test that site with browsers making a significant hit rate to your
> site.  You could set an arbitrary minimum number of different browsers to
> test (say the top five) regardless of total hit rate, or a hit
> rate (i.e.,
> testing all browser versions hitting your site above that hit
> rate).  Naming browsers based on personal preference and then using that
> list to test a site is excluding one basic fact - the users!
>
> Kukla
>
>
> At 11:06 PM 1/23/02 +0000, Nicky Danino wrote:
> >Hi everyone
> >
> >I am glad this list got fired up again, I had forgotten I signed up.
> >
> >I know someone (Mike?) spoke about browsers a few messages ago
> but I have
> >a question about them.
> >
> >If I wanted to test my website for accessibility, which are the top 5
> >access methods (ie browsers) that I should use.
> >
> >I have IE, NN, SimplyWeb, PWwebspeak, HomePage Reader, Opera,
> ECast?? (or
> >something like that), and a text to speech thingy. I cannot
> afford Jaws, I
> >only have access to what the University provide for me.
> >
> >So what is everyone's top 5?
> >
> >Nicky
> >University of Central Lancashire
> >UK
> >
> ><<< Mike Paciello <paciello(at)webable.com>  1/23 10:53p >>>
> >Can I suggest that the recent Forrester Report provides
> compelling business
> >data for supporting web accessibility....if you have an account
> there, you
> >can download the article, "Design Accessible Sites Now".
> >
> >Regards,
> >
> >Mike
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-aware-techniques(at)hwg.org
> > > [mailto:owner-aware-techniques(at)hwg.org]On Behalf Of Mike Livsey
> > > Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 5:13 PM
> > > To: aware-techniques(at)hwg.org
> > > Subject: Re: Hello?
> > >
> > >
> > > According to the US Census, disabilities affect one-fifth of all
> > > Americans and 1
> > >
> > > in 10 have a severe disability. Do these people surf the web?
> > > They sure do.
> > >
> > > You can read the report at:
> > > http://www.census.gov/prod/3/97pubs/cenbr975.pdf
> > >
> > > Mike Livsey
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Lauren Hanka wrote:
> > >
> > > > Great input Sarah, but you should believe what you are
> hearing, because
> > > > since I've said it, there must be others thinking it also.
> > > >
> > > > Please tell us just why we should care! Hearing? Most Web sites are
> > > > quite --why would *that* matter? Cognitive/motor? What problems
> > > and how do
> > > > we adjust? --is it practical? --would it *really* create a
> benefit? If a
> > > > site is made to be easily usable for the widest possible
> > > audience, does that
> > > > mean making a site *less* than what it could be for the *broad*
> > > majority of
> > > > users? Should the broad majority have bland sites because of the
> > > > difficulties of a few? What is the percentage of users who
> > > require specially
> > > > designed sites compared to those that do not?
> > > >
> > > > *Why* does such designing make smart business sense? What is
> > > the percentage
> > > > of people who *will or do* use the Web compared to the
> > > percentage of people
> > > > with disabilities? --because it is not the same figure.
> > > >
> > > > Hey, John... like the liveliness? :)
> > > >
> > > > Lauren
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free (at)yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>

HWG: hwg-basics mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA