W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2001

Re: QUESTION: use of javascript to comply with Sect 508

From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 11:44:30 -0500
Message-Id: <200101041639.LAA377533@smtp2.mail.iamworld.net>
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
At 10:19 AM 2001-01-04 -0500, Beth Skwarecki wrote:
>> Here's the text:
>> (l) When pages utilize scripting languages to display content, or to create
>> interface elements, the information provided by the script shall be
>> identified with functional text that can be read by assistive technology. 
>  ^^^^^^^^^^
>  [identification, not an equivalent?]
>
>That sounds like it would be valid just to have text saying "if you can't
>see this DHTML menu, you're missing a really nice DHTML menu. Goodbye."
>Surely that's not what they mean?! 
>

AG::

Just as it is easy to read 'identified' in a way that is too loose, it is easy
to read 'equivalent' in a way that is too tight.  We have had lots of problems
with people not grasping the optional [rough] implied where we talk about
equivalents.  What is really intended in either case (WCAG or 508) is
something
in the middle where the stretch to describe it either way is just a little
stretch.

If we can build a good corpus of good examples, I don't think that we will
have
a lot of trouble getting those who are trying to comply with 508 to emulate
the
examples.  "Damn the terminology, full TECHNIQUES ahead!" (see GL list
mobilizing to build techniques in this and other areas)

Al

>--beth
>--
><http://playground.alfred.edu/~bethnewt/>http://playground.alfred.edu/~bet
hnewt/
>  
Received on Thursday, 4 January 2001 11:39:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:53 GMT