__/ [ Spartanicus ] on Thursday 30 March 2006 16:05 \__
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>Government sites fail web tests
>>,----[ Quote ]
>>| More than half of government and council websites
>>| contain errors and cause problems for disabled
>>| people, research shows.
> A pet peeve of mine: As a national publicly funded broadcaster the BBC
> shouldn't be allowed to produce the junk web pages *it* puts online.
I agree that there is a fair bit of 'junk' therein. I have worked on the
source code from the BBC in order to produce mockups and it's a tabular mess
at times. It's also *huge* in terms of page (HTML markup) size. I wonder if
they have not improved in the interest preserving uniformity throughout the
site. Their pages all appear to be static (ruling out the possibility of a
URL re-write engine).
> IIRC the BBC use a short list of "supported browsers" (which really *is*
> short) and effectively "supported Operating Systems", they produce
> content in reprehensible multimedia formats, they insist on optional
> technologies like JS being enabled on the client etc. The BBC's record
> with regard to accessibility of its online content is truly abysmal.
You rarely find exceptions to that, so in the respect, the BBC are OK. They
also provide instructions to Linux users, which I find encouraging.
Roy S. Schestowitz
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
12:45pm up 23 days 2:30, 10 users, load average: 0.86, 0.71, 0.52
http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine