W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 1998

Re: RIT - Javascript

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charlesn@sunrise.srl.rmit.edu.au>
Date: Tue, 5 May 1998 12:28:21 +1000 (EST)
To: Liam Quinn <liam@htmlhelp.com>
cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.980505121737.13051B-100000@sunrise.srl.rmit.edu.au>
Liam is right about NOSCRIPT adding stuff into pages. LONGDESC does not 
seem to be appropriate for scripts, and I do not see another way around 
the problem. 

In general terms, many users are coming across things they 
cannot 'see' all the time - I use lynx at home because I have no other 
Internet access - I can see images when I am at work, and would quite 
like to know what I should mark for reviewing or download. 

The javascript problem is a bit trickier - there are a few things that 
should be added for accessibility beyond just referring the browser to an 
image, but I think Liam has provided the pointer towards the best solution.

The point of a NOSCRIPT is to decribe a script. Having thought about it a 
little more, I would usually place the description in comments anyway, 
which obviates the need for NOSCRIPT.

Charles McCathieNevile

I wrote, Liam responded:
> CMCCN::
> >Nonsense. The NOSCRIPT above is perfectly appropriate. Imagine (for 
> >example) a Javascript capable browser, which has scripts temporarily 
> >disabled. The use of NOSCRIPT to the extent I have described would enable 
> >a user to determine whether scripts should be enabled or not.
> 
> LQ::  Imagine a browser which has scripts permanently disabled.  The use of
> NOSCRIPT to the extent you have described provides an unnecessary
> distraction while reminding the user that the Web doesn't cater to such
> people.
> 
CMCCN::
> >In addition, describing the action of a script is like using a LONGDESC 
> >for an image
> 
> LQ::  Then push for a LONGDESC attribute for SCRIPT.  NOSCRIPT is for
> alternate content, and alternate content is not a description of what the
> user's missing.
> 
CMCCN::
> >An example of where NOSCRIPT might make a difference is at
> >http://www.srl.rmit.edu.au/peterbat/roaringforties/index.html
> 
> LQ::  All this page has to do is use the image URI in the HREF and add
> "return false" to the "change" function.  Then the page transparently
> provides an alternative to the script, making a NOSCRIPT element
> unnecessary and distracting.
> 
> -- 
> Liam Quinn
> Web Design Group            Enhanced Designs, Web Site Development
> http://www.htmlhelp.com/    http://enhanced-designs.com/
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 4 May 1998 22:47:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:39 GMT