- From: Jim Ley <jim@e-media.co.uk>
- Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 14:36:48 -0000
- To: "Matt May" <mcmay@yahoo.com>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> The user experience without script is prone to error and, quite honestly, > abysmal, particularly in online grocery. It's not a viable approach for many > sites to design sites to function both with and without script and across > browser versions. Why is it not a viable approach? What is the specific reasons that makes it non-viable, the ability the site developers is pretty much all I can come up with. > If it is possible to allow users of assistive technologies to > work with existing sites, even where they require JavaScript, I think we should > absolutely show how to do so, and allow for a claim of compliance. Of course we should, I've never said otherwise. > [...we should be...] providing success criteria and compliance > scenarios for sites which insist that the functionality of JavaScript is > necessary. How can these sites insist that, there's no requirement for UA's to support javascript, and there's no requirement to implement the relevant parts of the Object Model. Javascript is an excellent tool for adding usability and accessibility enhancements, of course if you could come up with an example I'd have to withdraw all my remarks, but I've yet to see one. Jim.
Received on Wednesday, 26 September 2001 10:42:37 UTC