W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > July to September 2001

Re: [w3c-wai-gl] <none>

From: Matt May <mcmay@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2001 07:49:27 -0700
Message-ID: <001901c145d1$4706e480$6501a8c0@vaio>
To: "Jim Ley" <jim@e-media.co.uk>, "GLWAI Guidelines WG \(GL - WAI Guidelines WG\)" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Ley" <jim@e-media.co.uk>
> Or indeed decades old technology, the continual love affair with XML
> doesn't help, it only distracts.
> we have more than enough languages, structures etc. to
> provide us with all we need, we should concentrate on ensuring these are
> accessible, not encouraging people to invent languages which are
> completely inaccessible in reality whatever there theoretical
> accessibility.

I disagree on both these points, and I think the developers of languages
like MathML are with me. One goal of the W3C is to oversee the construction
of the Semantic Web. It's not in anyone's best interest for this group to
say they really shouldn't do that because it's all been done before.

> >(And as a plug
> > for the techniques format I designed, there is actually room to do just
> > that...)
> Can you provide a url for this, a search turned up nothing.

The thread starts here:

> I disagree, depending on what you mean by accessibility, form validation,
> menu systems, are all about increasing the accessibility of a page,
> obviously from a comprehensibility point of view, rather than relating to
> specific interested groups.

Those are usability enhancements to me.

> > This has to do with preventing
> > JavaScript from hiding textual content from the user in the myriad ways
> the
> > language does so.
> The language doesn't hide anything, the (incompetent?) script authors
> choose to hide it, there is a distinction in my mind at least.

Not to me. It's a fault of the language if it's not designed to work with
assistive technologies. For its part, JavaScript (1.0) was barely designed
at all.

I'd be very careful using the word "incompetent" with respect to authors.
The vast majority of web developers may be seen as incompetent with HTML 4,
much less script. This can also be a fault of the languages providing
ill-advised features which become standard but commonly hinder accessibility
(tables, frames, document.images, window.status).

old MM
> > Still, JavaScript has a role in modern browser development
> > as a rudimentary evaluator of browser capabilities, for example, which
> > cannot be overlooked.

> Please explain?  Either javascript can provide a lot more than
> rudimentary evaluator of browser capabilities or it can do very great
> harm (cf. Object Detection, over Browser Detection.) Rudimentary attempts
> almose certainly do more harm than good.

What JavaScript does is pretty basic compared to what CC/PP will do. This is
what I meant by rudimentary.

old MM
> > It can also provide good usability gains: most search
> > engines use it to focus on the search text input.
> This is not a usability gain

To most people, it is.


Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Received on Tuesday, 25 September 2001 10:49:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:39 UTC