W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 2008

RE: JavaScript and Screen Readers

From: Ryan Jean <ryanj@disnetwork.org>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:15:27 -0400
To: "'David Woolley'" <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <E1KVR5Y-0003Bb-3a@bart.w3.org>

The funny thing is when I use "document.write()" or "innerHTML", the screen
reader will read the alt in the img tag but not the text. The only way I
worked around all this "document.write()" issue is to set everything in a
textarea tag. The issue with that is it removes all HTML coding and you lose
images.

Sincerely,
Ryan Jean
Assistant IT Specialist
The Disability Network
Flint, MI


-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of David Woolley
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 5:05 PM
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Subject: Re: JavaScript and Screen Readers


Isofarro wrote:
> 

> This has nothing to do with Java. If you feel you need to contact the 
> organisation responsible/taking care for JavaScript, then you need to 
> contact ECMA, but I doubt you will find the answer there. Perhaps a 

ECMA only specify ECMAScript, the core programming language and the 
non-document, non-brower, supporting library.  Most of what actually 
causes problems is in the document and browser object models, whose 
origins are in a de facto standard by Netscape, since expanded by 
Microsoft, although parts of them (but not, for example, document 
loading time use of document.write) are standardised by W3C.

> better place will be Mozilla's accessibility mailing list, since Mozilla 
> is the direct descendent of Netscape Corporation which originally 
> created the JavaScript language. Aaron Lowenthal is probably the best 
> placed person to talk to about accessible JavaScript.

In practice, W3C's attempts to make people manipulate the DOM as a tree 
structure have been ignored, by the market, in favour of load time 
document.write and Microsoft's InnerHTML.


-- 
David Woolley
Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want.
RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam,
that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work.
Received on Tuesday, 19 August 2008 13:17:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:28 GMT