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

RE: is javascript considered good wacg 2.0 practice? [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

From: Perkins, Eric B. (VITA) <Eric.Perkins@vita.virginia.gov>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 21:04:56 +0000
To: "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>, "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <587B055EC4E7D247AD0AA76D97404DB6363CAC@COVMSGCES-MBX01>
Please take me off your mailing list. Thank you.

-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick H. Lauke [mailto:redux@splintered.co.uk] 
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 4:03 PM
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Subject: Re: is javascript considered good wacg 2.0 practice? [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

On 18/12/2012 20:58, accessys@smart.net wrote:
>
> no argument, just stating the obvious

cool, so we agree then that JavaScript is an acceptable technology that can be used, if used properly, in light of WCAG 2.0...as that was the original question?

P
-- 
Patrick H. Lauke
______________________________________________________________
re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively
[latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]

www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk
http://redux.deviantart.com | http://flickr.com/photos/redux/

______________________________________________________________
twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
______________________________________________________________

Received on Tuesday, 18 December 2012 21:05:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 18 December 2012 21:05:23 GMT