W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2008

Re: Accessibility requirement

From: Marcos Caceres <marcosscaceres@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 11:49:43 +0100
Message-ID: <b21a10670807150349h5a11dfe5te2d3edbe6f40f282@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Cynthia Shelly" <cyns@exchange.microsoft.com>
Cc: "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>

On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 12:10 AM, Cynthia Shelly
<cyns@exchange.microsoft.com> wrote:
> Interesting...
> My experience has been that HTML 4.01 can be made accessible if it is carefully coded. WCAG 2.0 has many >techniques for this, including for scripted and styled content.  While it is true than many (possibly most) DHTML >applications have accessibility issues, I do not believe that this is the fault of the standard so much as the >authors.  Do you have examples of things that cannot be made accessible in HTML 4.01?

I agree in principle (though not with WCAG 2.0, but I don't want to
start a thread about WCAG 2.0 and accessibility).

I guess rather than writing out a list, I can simply cite the ARIA
spec [1] as it basically lists some of things that are missing for
accessibility in HTML4.01. Fortunately, ARIA has found a home in HTML5
but, from a standardization perspective, that's years away from
completion. Widgets, we assume/hope, we package HTML5 applications in
the future but we are standardizing, for better or for worsts, on
HTML4.01.

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/
-- 
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
Received on Tuesday, 15 July 2008 10:56:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:27 GMT