W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2005

Re: [css3-ui] Problems with :read-only and :read-write

From: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2005 07:23:51 +0100 (BST)
Message-Id: <200508030623.j736Npp00347@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
To: www-style@w3.org

> The issue is that the HTML/CSS consortium is affecting not just
> myself, but millions if not billions of users around the world, many

I think you are failing to realise that W3C is fighting a rearguard
action here.  That's particularly true on HTML; CSS people tend to take
more of a presentational view from the start.  If W3C simply followed
the desires of its member companies, I think we would have just had more
presentational features in HTML, and no separation of styling. In the
end, only legislation achieves accessibility, and even then designers
will look for loopholes.

(I do have issues with SVG, which seems to me to be simply Adobe's
Flash (although they now own Flash), instead of allowing vector
images.)

> of whom don't have a voice here. I hear everyday from people about the
> annoyances of the web and when I don't hear it, I see it. And you're
> saying it's too entrenched? I can't imagine a more strained argument
> against progress.

Progress is a very loaded word.  The people who want to have total
control of the "user experience" see moves in that direction as
progress, whereas I see them as regression to the state of things
before the web, when there were tools like PDF and various sales
presentation software packages.

> that if you turn off CSS, they stop working. Not all, but a lot. There
> are even more websites that stop working if you turn off Javascript.

There is, unfortunately, a significant lobby even in the accessibility
industry to allow scripting only sites; Section 508 is fairly permissive
on scripting.
Received on Wednesday, 3 August 2005 20:47:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:39 GMT