| Introduction | | | | The case for removing the distraction of a text only |
| Since the mid 1990s, when web accessibility first | | | | site is profound. The task of attempting to sustain |
| emerged as an unarguable concern, ideas and | | | | two sites, each on an equal footing, is wasteful of |
| attitudes have evolved to a point where we | | | | both time and resources. It may also be to the |
| understand a great deal about not only the | | | | detriment of the organisation's reputation. |
| technicalities but also the psychology of achieving | | | | Demographics clearly indicate that the percentage of |
| true accessibility. | | | | people using a text only site will be significantly |
| This evolution of ideas means methods first | | | | smaller than the mainstream audience. This means |
| proposed as ideal solutions for accessibility are now | | | | that the majority of traffic will pass through the |
| outmoded and no longer provide the sustainability | | | | primary site, generating the most revenue and |
| required by content rich web sites and ever widening | | | | interest. The logic is therefore to allocate considerable |
| audiences. | | | | resources to sustaining the site that is driving the |
| Once it was deemed satisfactory to design a web | | | | organisation forward most effectively, but the |
| site with unrestrained visual creativity and simply | | | | inescapable consequence of this is the demise in |
| append a text only alternative site to bridge the gap | | | | quality of the secondary site. |
| to accessibility. This is no longer necessary. [1] | | | | If the dual sites cannot be sustained with equal |
| The technology now exists to design a single, visually | | | | vigour and resources, the discrepancy in quality |
| engaging web site that can be accessed by | | | | merely grows to a point where the text only site is |
| everybody. Moreover, the importance of considering | | | | an appendage without purpose or integrity. It is far |
| human nature in achieving this has now propelled web | | | | better to opt for a single site from the inception and |
| accessibility into a field combining a surprising variety | | | | to focus development and effort into sustaining it as |
| of disciplines. | | | | a singular example of the brand it represents. |
| The reasons for choosing this single site approach are | | | | Inclusivity |
| not legion but they are compelling:- | | | | The brand factor is key to the decision of whether a |
| - Cost Effectiveness | | | | single or dual site approach is appropriate. It may be |
| - Sustainability | | | | believed that an organisation who provides a text |
| - Inclusivity | | | | only site is acting altruistically. However, when viewed |
| Cost Effectiveness | | | | by someone who is compelled to use such a site, the |
| It is an insurmountable fact that running two sites, | | | | perspective is starkly different. |
| instead of one, will be more expensive. There is | | | | In our recent past we have impelled people to use |
| simply no way to avoid this. | | | | different services on account of their race and we |
| At best it will require additional hosting and storage | | | | have insisted that they do different jobs on account |
| space in which to house the duplicated pages. If your | | | | of their gender -- we have now come to recognise |
| site is only small then this may not be problematic, | | | | the error of our ways. Now that the technology |
| but when a site runs to hundreds of pages or more | | | | exists to offer a single site that is accessible by |
| this can represent a significant and unrelenting cost. If | | | | everybody, do we really want to suggest they use a |
| your pages are dynamically generated then each | | | | different one on account of their disability? |
| additional version of the site will require more | | | | It is at the very core of humanity to belong to a |
| processing power. | | | | community. Whether it is a football team, a group of |
| At worst there is the further expense of maintaining | | | | pub regulars or afficionados of a television series, we |
| the replicated sets of pages and the inevitable | | | | all band together because we like to feel included. No |
| increase of web development costs this involves. | | | | one likes being excluded, and understanding this is a |
| Both of these financial commitments are continuous | | | | powerful tool in web accessibility. |
| and will need to be maintained for as long as the dual | | | | An organisation that manifests this understanding by |
| web sites exist. Whether you are a private sector | | | | choosing one site for all people will benefit from an |
| organisation, answerable to shareholders, or a public | | | | enhanced brand reputation. In our multicultural society |
| sector body, answerable to the taxpayer, it is | | | | the need to embrace all potential Internet visitors is a |
| difficult to justify increasing project costs to | | | | requisite for an organisation that aims to be forward |
| implement an unnecessary solution. | | | | thinking and successful. |
| There are products that automatically create text | | | | The very people who are assumed to benefit from a |
| only sites such as Content Management Systems, | | | | text only site would prefer not to use one. |
| and scripts that will recreate your site without | | | | Conclusion |
| graphics. However, these products cannot add | | | | It can all be reduced to a very simple argument. If an |
| additional information and structural cues that people | | | | organisation is serious about their reputation and |
| who use access technologies cannot get out of a | | | | quality of service, if they want to be cost and |
| regular site. | | | | resource effective over a sustained period of time |
| When a regular site (such as this one) is set up to be | | | | and if they want to be an example of social |
| compliant with international accessibility guidelines [2] | | | | responsibility -- the single site approach is simply the |
| and follows web standards, there is no need for a | | | | only choice. |
| text only version. For example, you can remove | | | | 'One for all and all for one!' - Alexander Dumas, 1884. |
| images and remove the style to see only this page's | | | | References and further reading |
| text - all without the need for a second version. | | | | |
| (JavaScript required for these functions. Press your | | | | 1. Accessify: Attractive accessible sites. |
| browser's refresh button to restore this page to its | | | | 2. |
| original form.) | | | | W3C: Web content accessibility guideline 11.4 |
| Sustainability | | | | 3. |