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: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 12:19:58 +0100
Message-ID: <CA++-QFfiTYYkji2zuNQ9KUU5PwiCHSuuou=kdzV189Mu4ba_Tw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ramón Corominas <listas@ramoncorominas.com>
Cc: Karen Lewellen <klewellen@shellworld.net>, John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>, W3C WAI ig <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>, David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>, Steve Green <steve.green@testpartners.co.uk>
On 14 December 2012 10:54, Ramón Corominas <listas@ramoncorominas.com>wrote:

> Highways have room for people to walk only in case of emergency, but you
> are not allowed to walk in a normal situation. Bikes or horses are not
> allowed to enter a highway. If you want to use the highway, there are free
> modern cars available that you can use. You cannot complain because you
> decide to only use a bicycle.


Ironically, this exactly illustrates Karen's original point.
*Your point*: To be able to use the highway, you need a modern car; that's
perfectly acceptable;
*Karen's point*: If you do not want to make use of the highway you use a
bicycle. On an *alternative* route.

Karen is not complaining because the route requires a modern car; she is
merely asking that she too be allowed to get to the end-point.

Regards, Harry
Received on Monday, 17 December 2012 11:27:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 17 December 2012 11:27:44 GMT