W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > October to December 2012

Re: is javascript considered good wacg 2.0 practice?

From: Harry Loots <harry.loots@ieee.org>
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 15:43:53 +0100
Message-ID: <CA++-QFf-a2GUuwjFdKMrmuMj+BKYFm1SUuUfOBov0Gk==Bg-Mg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>
Cc: W3C WAI ig <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
On 14 December 2012 14:59, Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk> wrote:

> Taking the inadequate analogy further, asking for sites not to use JS at
> all because some users may not have readily available user agents that can
> deal with it properly is more akin to asking for all buildings to be flat,
> ground-level, as some people may not be able to use the ramps...
>

Or, we could look at it from the point of view that the stairs is the
JavaScript that enables technologies likes AJAX to enhance the experience
for 75% of users. A quick way to get to the top of the stairwell. I can
skip up the three or fours steps with almost no effort in a few seconds.
But if I can't use the stairs, then the ramp enables me, the remaining 25%
to also have access to the service. Some users may have the means to afford
battery operated wheelchairs; they'll require less effort. Others can only
afford hand-driven wheelchairs; they'll take longer, but they will still
have access. And yes, there will still be a tiny proportion of users, who
despite our best efforts, will be unable to access the service without
additional help. But at least, by providing the ramp, I have afforded the
majority of wheel-chair bound users access.

Kind regards, Harry
Received on Friday, 14 December 2012 14:44:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 14 December 2012 14:44:22 GMT