W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2004

RE: Scripting (was RE: Accessible road maps)

From: Phill Jenkins <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 11:21:28 -0500
To: "Patrick Lauke" <P.H.Lauke@salford.ac.uk>
Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF7B6F224A.60537494-ON86256EA7.00569D07-86256EA7.0059DB85@us.ibm.com>
>> Why do I see comments about the need to accommodate users 
>> of ALL browsers and AT applications when this clearly 
>> states "...until most user agents...".  Lynx seems to be 
>> one of the more popular browsers sited when something 
>> like scripting is raised.  Is it not the responsibility 
>> of the Lynx developers to make changes?
>
> The onus is obviously spread across various stakeholders here.
> Content developers, UA/AT developers and even end users.
> However, getting back on topic, on don't seem to recall any
> guideline stating "until all user agents support scripting,
> make sure you offer no-script and/or server-side alternatives"...
>
>Patrick

I agree that the phrase "until user agents" (see notes) is not part of 
WCAG 1.0 Guideline 6 that addresses scripting.  However, I have always had 
a issue with trying to be WCAG 1.0 double AA compliant that requires both 
the scripting to be directly accessible (see priority 2 checkpoints 6.4, 
6.5, 8.1, & 9.2) and requiring the page to work without scripting (see 
priority 1 checkpoint 6.3).  That approaches doubling the effort to do 
both.   The couple years newer Section 508 1194.22 Web standards only 
requires the directly accessible scripting.

What's even clearer is that even the WCAG techniques have a section title 
"12.4 Directly Accessible Scripts" (see notes).  Sure the techniques can 
be improved, and that's what Matt is leading, but it's clear, despite the 
opinion of a few, that there is in fact documented techniques by the W3C 
WAI WCAG working group entitled "12.4 Directly Accessible Scripts" and 
several checkpoints in WCAG 1.0 .  It appears to me that the debate about 
making scripting accessible has bee over for a while - it can be done, it 
should be done, it just needs more techniques on how it can be done.  Some 
say the only debate left is whether WCAG 2.0 should keep the checkpoint to 
make turning off scripting a priority one. Based on the definition of 
priority one, I believe that debate is also over since all disability 
groups are able to successfully access information and interact with 
directly accessible scripting with appropriately configured browsers & 
assistive technology.


Notes:

Priority 1:  A Web content developer must satisfy this checkpoint. 
Otherwise, one or more groups will find it impossible to access 
information in the document. Satisfying this checkpoint is a basic 
requirement for some groups to be able to use Web documents. 

Until user agents 
        http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/wai-pageauth.html#until-user-agents

WGAC Techniques 12.4: Directly Accessible Scripts 
   http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-HTML-TECHS/#directly-accessible-scripts

Regards,
Phill Jenkins
Received on Wednesday, 2 June 2004 12:34:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:13:32 UTC