W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2003

Re: Javascript

From: Isofarro <w3evangelism@faqportal.uklinux.net>
Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 12:58:31 +0100
Message-ID: <006c01c30fd9$2b3c5540$fbdce150@laptop>
To: "Scarlett Julian \(ED\)" <Julian.Scarlett@sheffield.gov.uk>, "'Angela Hilton'" <angela.hilton@umist.ac.uk>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>

From: Scarlett Julian (ED)
Subject: RE: Javascript

> I generally use my browser (currently Opera 7.1) with javascript disabled
so if I visited
> a site with menus that you're talking about I'd be stuck. Unless of course
you provided
> text-only equivalent links but then what's the point - may as well make
the first set
> accessible in the first place. (IMO)

The point is that dynamic dropdown menus (DHTML) improve the look and feel
of a website site, allowing you to have more navigational scope without
overpowering the visitor with options.

The moment you say "you might as well just have text-only links" is the same
moment when web designers see accessibility as nothing more than text-only
websites - you are only advocating the myth some of us are working hard to
dispell. Recall that accessibility is about providing _alternatives_ to
non-textual or dynamic content where practical - not _replacing_ them with
text-only non-dynamic components.

Naturally in the case of DHTML menus, there is a graceful fallback in the
noscript element, so a DHTML menu can be accessible by providing an
alternative.

Mike.
Received on Thursday, 1 May 2003 08:05:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:09 GMT