Re: rationale for checkpoint 8.1

more to consider are the security issues of some places where some types
of coding that is not html or approved by them are stripped out or the
pages do not function due to lack of completness when delivered.  There
are assistive technologies in addition to jaws and some older versions
of jaws and browser combinations where if propper fall back is not used
as is suggested here, there will be a lack of functionality.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Nick Kew" <nick@webthing.com>
To: "Pedlow, Robert" <Robert.Pedlow@team.telstra.com>
Cc: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 10:00 PM
Subject: Re: rationale for checkpoint 8.1



On Fri, 1 Mar 2002, Pedlow, Robert wrote:

> Hi
>    I am seeking advice on the reasons behind WCAG checkpoint 8.1.
>
> "Ensure that pages are usable when scripts, applets, or other
programmatic
> objects are turned off or not supported. If this is not possible,
provide
> equivalent information on an alternative accessible page. Make
programmatic
> elements such as scripts and applets directly accessible or compatible
with
> assistive technologies [Priority 1 if functionality is important and
not
> presented elsewhere...]Specifically they want to use Javascript.

How is Javascript a problem?  There are, and always have been, perfectly
good ways to use Javascript with graceful and accessible fallback.
At worst, just make use of <noscript> where necessary, and if you are
ever tempted to use the evil javascript: pseudo-protocol for forms or
links, change that to a valid destination and use event handlers for
the scripting.

> I am aware that JAWS is able to handle Javascript.
> Are there assistive technologies that cannot interact with Javascript?

Erm - not everyone can afford modern equipment.  Have a thought for
those
with an old 386 and 4Mb RAM, using Lynx, perhaps with a speech
reader[1].
Perfectly good with well-considered javascript, of course.

--
Nick Kew

Site Valet - the mark of Quality on the Web.
<URL:http://valet.webthing.com/>

Received on Saturday, 2 March 2002 11:31:12 UTC