Question for all candidates about their Plattform pages

On Fri, Mar 03, 2006 at 11:25:49AM +0100, Jutta Wrage wrote:
> In all other plattforms there are only minor validation problems that
> can be corrected easily without making a noticible difference. But as
> far as I can see, none of the pages really was valid HTML strict and
> none (or nearly none) uses semantic tags only, which would be better
> for people who can "see" only the text content.

I sent my platform to Manoj in plain text. I am very glad he take the
trouble to format it to HTML, but I have no responsibility in the
mark up.

I think several candidates (including me) had a short time frame to
come up with a platform so we had to focus on the content.

Cheers,
--
Bill. <ballombe.TakeThisOut@debian.org>

Imagine a large red swirl here.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-REQUEST.TakeThisOut@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster.TakeThisOut@lists.debian.org

Jutta Wrage wrote:
> 1. One of the candidates uses pictures to illustrate his platform, but
> does not give an alternative description for lynx users and blind
> people - accident?

My platform was originally in the form of one big PNG file since I
didn't want lynx users to be able to read it at all.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-REQUEST.TakeThisOut@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster.TakeThisOut@lists.debian.org

On Fri, Mar 03, 2006 at 11:25:49AM +0100, Jutta Wrage wrote:
> Maybe, it is not right, asking here as I am not a DD at all, but I
> wonder about the web presentation of candidates.

I think it's also for non-DD contributors important who's the DPL. So if
you want to bring up issues you feel are important, you're more than
welcome.

> 1. One of the candidates uses pictures to illustrate his platform,
> but does not give an alternative description for lynx users and blind
> people - accident?

It'd be quite far-fetched to think for any of the candidates that would
be intentional, I don't presume malice with most of my fellow candidates.

> 2. One of the candidates uses font tag (which is not valid HTML
> strict) and makes text not visible in graphical browsers due to the
> not noticible difference to the background. The hidden text is shown
> in lynx. - accident?

Unlikely.

> In all other plattforms there are only minor validation problems that
> can be corrected easily without making a noticible difference. But as
> far as I can see, none of the pages really was valid HTML strict and
> none (or nearly none) uses semantic tags only, which would be better
> for people who can "see" only the text content.

Personally, while I do think it's laudeable to do our best for standards
compliance for the best results for any type of web reader, I feel that
it's foremost the most important to achieve what you want to achieve,
and while things like semantic-tags-only would be an ideal world, in
practice, even using one or two non-semantic tags won't prevent
conveying the content of a page. It's the text that matters, after all,
especially with such things as a platform. The tags are only an aide,
and are not critical (c.f. my only sin with my platform, I used <emph>,
which doesn't exist -- and that you fixed to <em> after noticing that
and informing me).

While I like being a perfectionist in a lot of areas, it's undoable to
be one in avery aspect, so one needs to be a pragmatist in others. Time
is a precious resource.

--Jeroen

--
Jeroen van Wolffelaar
Jeroen DeleteThis @wolffelaar.nl (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357)
http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-REQUEST DeleteThis @lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster DeleteThis @lists.debian.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


Am 03.03.2006 um 19:23 schrieb Ted Walther:

> My platform was run through the HTML "tidy" program with the -asxml
> option. No warnings, errors, or complaints were output by the
> program,
> which declared it fully "XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" compliant.

Debian web pages are strict HTML and strict HTML does not allow font
tags. Beside that especially for a DPL platform I see no sense in
setting a font color, that makes content invisible in graphical
browsers. And I think the colour used (nearly white on white pages)
is no accident, is it?

Jutta


- --
http://www.witch.westfalen.de
http://witch.muensterland.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)

iEYEARECAAYFAkQOAVcACgkQOgZ5N97kHkerIwCaAlGmkhPKq+l/by9Dt32gcSQT
1HMAnidAiWEvIQoEUkUXl8mTxZJAl3BT
=FlNN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-REQUEST.TakeThisOut@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster.TakeThisOut@lists.debian.org