- From: Jim Byrne <j.byrne@gcal.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 11:00:02 +0100
- To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
on 16/5/02 7:52 am, Jukka Korpela at jukka.korpela@tieke.fi wrote: > Danny Ayers: > >> A good piece - your have a reasonable point and argue it well. On the >> downside I would say that it only gives part of the story. > > I think this impression might be mainly caused by the subtitle-like text > "Top ten accessibility problems created by use and misuse of CSS", which now > appears in the "breadcrumbs" and pointing to > http://www.mcu.org.uk/articles/cssaccessproblems > which points (via redirection) to the page itself. Reflexive links (i.e., a > link that points to the page itself) are confusing, and using different URLs > adds to the confusion, since a browser initially treats it as unvisited link > (since the _URL_ has not been visited). Maybe it's intended to become a > structural link that points to a page with links to nine other articles? Jukka, I agree, the 'breadcrumb' links are generated automatically - and this one went astray - I've fixed it. I know it's bad practice to have links on a page that point to themselves - but I will need to figure out how to change the script that generates the breadcrumbs to sort that problem. I intend to get around to it. > > But despite such problems, and other (minor) problems in the accessibility > of the page itself, like using alt="Decorative photo: white flowers." > instead of alt="" title="Decorative photo: white flowers.", I found the page > very good, too. I'm biased, in a sense, since I've presented similar points > for years, e.g. in my article "Lurching Toward Babel: HTML, CSS, and XML" in > "Computer" in July 1998, > http://computer.org/computer/co1998/pdf/r7103.pdf > (Yes, in PDF format! Not my choice.) We could argue about what should appear in the alt attribute - but we would only be covering old ground. I like to regard myself as flexible enough to change when persuaded by good arguments, but for the moment I'm doing it the way I'm doing it. > >> You make the point that using e.g. <SPAN> rather than <H1> for things that > >> are headers is lacking something, though you don't actually pin down what > it >> is. > > I think the article presents that fairly well - it points out that <SPAN> > lacks a defined meaning that could be adequately processed by programs, such > as indexing robots, speech synthesis, browsers applying user style sheets, > etc. And let's not forget browsers with CSS turned off (or not supported at > all). What does <SPAN> degrade to? Nothing. There's no reason why <SPAN> > markup per se should be processed in any particular way. > > For example, when headings are adequately marked up, a browser that > generates speech can pause before a heading, read it slowly, pause, and > continue its normal (fast) speed. This makes the document _much_ clearer and > easier to listen; it is comparable to using spacing and large fonts in > visual presentation. A browser could not, and should not, do anything like > that with <SPAN>, even if the tag has class="otsikko" or class="rubrik" (or > even class="heading" - it would be quite unappropriate for a browser to make > guesses based on what some string might mean in some particular natural > language). > > Sure, you could write an aural style sheet for some <SPAN>s. Even in > principle, it would solve just small part of the problem. In practice, when > did you last see a browser supporting aural style sheets? Besides, trying to > cover _all_ the possible presentation environments by writing style sheets > for them is an endless task. Some browsers use one font only but variation > in font color to indicate major structural ingredients like headings. They > do it automatically, as long as you use appropriate markup; but you can't > make them do that for your <SPAN>s. snip.... I agree; HTML is a 'structured markup' language; there is a hierarchy of elements that makes sense, and agreement about what each tag means. That is what I am saying in the article - no need to re-invent the wheel. All the best, Jim -- Jim Byrne Project Director, The Making Connections Unit, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow G4 OBA, 0141 331 3893 Everything you need to know about publishing accessible information on the Web. Services: Website Accessibility Audits, Accessible Web design, Accessible Website Management Training. The Making Connections Unit: http://www.mcu.org.uk/ Scottish Disability Information Mailing list: http://www.mcu.org.uk/mailinglists/
Received on Thursday, 16 May 2002 06:00:38 UTC