- From: Jim Ley <jim.ley@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2005 17:52:10 +0000
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
On 12/7/05, Julian Scarlett <Julian.Scarlett@eden.gov.uk> wrote: > > Ah, perhaps I wasn't clear enough. I was trying to say that > > if JavaScript degrades gracefully, then you shouldn't need to > > mention it at all. No, <noscript>, just nothing. > > > > Forgive my ignorance but I rarely use client-side scripting so it's >not been an issue for me before but doesn't the lack of <noscript> > go against WCAG1 checkpoints? I've always been under the > impression that <noscript> was required for all javascript but >maybe not so long as it's device independent. Yes/no? Only if your intreptetation of WCAG1 is that broken. NOSCRIPT as a whole should not be used, there's no situation where noscript is a sufficient discriminator to enable accessibility. If your script is required for your content to be accessible, then noscript does not solve the problem, as only partial support for script would render the content inaccessible. noscript does nothing to improve accessibility, and can only damage it, it's another part of the bad advice in WCAG 1. Jim.
Received on Wednesday, 7 December 2005 17:55:14 UTC