RE: advisory tech for 2.5.1

Hi Sophia

I don't mind amending the technique to say there should be a link from the
field to the list rather than automatic return. I agree in general that
there should be JavaScript fallbacks. Is it necessary for us to say that in
every technique that uses JavaScript? Should we make a global resolution to
put a note on every JavaScript technique that there should be a fallback.
I'm OK with that.

If I make that edit about the link is the technique OK?

David

access empowers people...
        ...barriers disable them...
 
www.eramp.com 

-----Original Message-----
From: Sofia Celic [mailto:Sofia.Celic@visionaustralia.org] 
Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2007 7:41 PM
To: David MacDonald
Cc: public-wcag-teamc@w3.org
Subject: RE: advisory tech for 2.5.1



Hi David,

I'm not saying that Javascript should be ignored. Not at all. Javascript
is an important part of the web that can vastly improve the user
experience - for both usability and accessibility. However, it needs to
be used smartly until user agents catch up with new technologies/uses
and provide effective and efficient means of their use for all users.
This may mean that backup implementations need to be in place.

<start quote>
But assuming it was, do know of anyone
who uses a custom loaded style sheet? In 10 years I've never met anyone
who
has used a custom stylesheet (besides a lab that was testing it) and I
have
asked other consultants and they've never heard of anyone using a custom
stylesheet (beside doing a test on it). Do you think this is an issue?
<end quote>

I know of people who would really like this capability. It is not
practically possible right now, on the most part.
In particular, people who are colour blind and would really like to be
able layer their own CSS on top of the author's one when links do not
have underlines. They don't want to change the author's layout or colour
scheme or anything other than links.

<start quote>
In practice I've seen the list of errors implemented quite successfully
in
banks etc...
Although I haven't seen focus automatically sent there. But if the list
of
errors are links to the corresponding fields then I think it would be
quite
a good experience for a sighted person. Because they would simple make
one
click to the next error field, and that is faster than getting there by
scrolling to the next error.
<end quote>

It is only a very specific part of the technique that I believe sighted,
mouse users would find annoying: being automatically taken back to the
list of errors when they leave the form control where they have just
fixed an error.
This could be avoided by implementing a "manual" link after the form
control instead of an automatic shift. Selecting the link, if the user
should want to, would then take the user back to the list of errors.

Sofia




________________________________

<< ella for Spam Control >> has removed 505 Spam messages and set aside
262 Later for me
You can use it too - and it's FREE!  www.ellaforspam.com	

-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.13/726 - Release Date: 3/18/2007
3:34 PM
 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.13/726 - Release Date: 3/18/2007
3:34 PM

Received on Monday, 19 March 2007 12:44:22 UTC