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

Re: is javascript considered good wacg 2.0 practice?

From: David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2012 10:42:20 +0000
Message-ID: <50CC540C.6010201@david-woolley.me.uk>
To: 'wai-ig list' <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Adam Cooper wrote:

> First, Javascript is not a practice. It is a ubiquitous, useful, and
> enduring  scripting language  that is accessibility neutral.  WCAG includes

To be pedantic, Javascript isn't a scripting language; it is the 
combination of one (Ecmascript) and various browser and document models. 
Strictly speaking it refers to those models as in early versions of 
scriptable Netscape browsers, although it is now used for any 
combination of Ecmascript and such object models. It is not a 
technically precise term.

It is, in fact, the object models that are the difficult bit and prevent 
the common text only browsers and netsurf implementing "javascript". 
The netsurf road plan for javascript also mentions the need for internal 
structures that support efficient dynamic modification of the document 
and its style sheets (many javascripted sites need a lot of processing 
power - it can now take 30 seconds to a minute to get a page up on my 
old, 350MHz, machine).

-- 
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 Saturday, 15 December 2012 10:42:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 15 December 2012 10:42:52 GMT