Re: Why Won't this Site Work in LYNX?

Interestingly enough that our site requires JavaScript statement, at least 
for  me personally, can often be wrong when using lynx.
Your point about wacg being  influenced by consultants is well 
taken..which is  disturbing because so much of it gets incorporated into 
public policy.
A11y is starting to follow suit.
speaking personally, until more individuals using adaptive technology start 
talking to more than their chosen choir, and start talking to the general 
population, the meet one adaptive technology user you have met them all 
standard will continue.
I mean there is a thread on list arguing about voiceover and safari 
testing, as in not   fitting their standards either.



On Wed, 4 May 2022, David Woolley wrote:

> On 03/05/2022 01:15, Karen Lewellen wrote:
>
>
>>  The technical baseline clause in  at least some editions of WACG
>>  discourages that sort of thing, unless you are providing the tool in
>>  question.
>
> WCAG also allows any technology for which support is widely available in 
> mainstream browser, and even includes an AJAX mail client as an example 
> <https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#dfn-web-page-s>, which would be totally 
> unusable in Lynx.  Simply stating that your page requires JavaScript is 
> enough to, legally, exclude Lynx as a testing aid.
>
> The rather convoluted description of what support needs to be available 
> before a technology, such as Javascript, is acceptable, is in 
> <https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/conformance#uc-accessibility-supported-definition-head>.
>
> Lynx is unlikely to be considered mainstream, these days.
>
> You need to remember that WCAG is specified by consultants and browser 
> manufacturers, who are influenced by the "needs" of businesses, as well what 
> may be good for elements of the public.  (It reminds me of the Covid debate 
> on economy versus health.)
>
>
>