- From: Tom Croucher <tcroucher@netalleynetworks.com>
- Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:12:47 +0100
- To: <gdeering@acslink.net.au>, "'James Craig'" <work@cookiecrook.com>
- Cc: "'WAI Interest Group'" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Geoff, I think you missed the point of what I was saying. Turning scripts off does not necessarily disable all functionality. Menus should be constructed with a top level which is not reliant on scripting. This then serves as an anchor for a drop down (or drop out) menu to drop from. If scripts are off the extra menu will not appear but the top link should still be available. While it is possible to craft dhtml menus that are not accessible it is also perfectly possible to make menus which are. They simply add functionality for people who use scripts. This does not constitute inaccessibility. Tom -----Original Message----- From: Geoff Deering [mailto:gdeering@acslink.net.au] Sent: 23 September 2003 21:54 To: tcroucher@netalleynetworks.com; 'James Craig' Cc: 'WAI Interest Group' Subject: RE: Call for feedback on accessible DHTML menus That is true, but if you turn scripts off, in this case it renders the menus unfunctional and therefore inaccessible in every sense. A site CANNOT be accessible with dhtml menus if scripts are turned off. This is not a screen reader issue or anything as such, it is a basic usability problem. With scripts turned off DHTML menus like these are dead (as in a dead parrot). http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT-TECHS/#tech-scripts 6.3 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. [Priority 1] You cannot use DHTML for menuing and meet this checkpoint because DHTML menus require scripts being turned on. WCAG1 is an excellent document addressing both accessibility and basic usability requirements. The people who wrote it understood these issues. It not only is a great document for accessibility, but also an incredible document for understanding basic usability problems, and covers many checkpoints that many usability experts completely overlook. A lot of usability professionals do not take into account all the myriad ways people choose to configure their user agent. Thanks to the WCAG GL we do have checkpoints that are not only good for accessibility, but also for usability. Many people are under the illusion that even if their page depends on javascript to function that it still meets accessibility under WCAG1 P1. A lot of this had to do with Bobby (cast.org version at least) not checking even for the existence of <NOSCRIPT> tags alongside <SCRIPT> tags. They would bet the WCAG1 P1 seal of approval from Bobby and away they go. But as I said in my first post, many people that do not require accessibility features browse with scripts turned off, or use a current browser or use 3rd party software to control the function of many parts of the DOM. Unfortunately Javascript has been misused by a lot of developers (mouse traps, etc), and those who want to use it to enhance accessibility and usability are confronted with people who use these techniques to protect themselves from Javascript misuse. DHTML menus also present usability problems for people who have not come across them before. They often find them confusing behavoir in a hypertext medium. I'm not for or against them. Really they are often a great and more elegant alternative to what other hypertext alternatives there are. They can really help users get into a site deeply with just one hypertext action. And if James's menuing is more accessible than most others out there, then that is great work. But don't kid yourself that it meets WCAG1 requirements. There are very good reasons for WCAG1 checkpoint 6.3 Geoff Deering -----Original Message----- From: Tom Croucher Accessibility and functionality are not the same. A site can be accessible with dhtml menus if one can still use the site. You should think of drop down menus as more link options. If the main links (at the top of the menu) are still usable it doesn't matter. Most of this is completely a mute point for screen readers which often see the entire menu anyway since the dhtml menus usually just visually hide the extra options they don't want on screen at any point. Tom Croucher Co-founder Netalley Networks (http://www.netalleynetworks.com), BSc(Hons) Computing Student / Information Services Staff University of Sunderland (http://www.sunderland.ac.uk), Accessibility Co-ordinator Plone CMS (http://www.plone.org) -----Original Message----- From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Geoff Deering Sent: 22 September 2003 21:16 To: James Craig Cc: WAI Interest Group Subject: RE: Call for feedback on accessible DHTML menus To quote directly from http://www.w3.org/DOM/ <q> "Dynamic HTML" is a term used by some vendors to describe the combination of HTML, style sheets and scripts that allows documents to be animated. </q> The title of your subject is "Call for feedback on accessible DHTML menus". If you turn scripts off in the user agent it disables this type of menuing system because it depend on scripts being turned on to be operatable. Have you tried using it with scripts turned off? This is what I mean by the site being dependant on DHTML. If it is built on such a menuing system it is dependant on DHTML and for anyone with scripts turn off it is unusable. Geoff -----Original Message----- From: James Craig [mailto:work@cookiecrook.com] Sent: Tuesday, 23 September 2003 1:23 AM To: gdeering@acslink.net.au Subject: Re: Call for feedback on accessible DHTML menus Geoff Deering wrote: > The problem with this is WCAG1 Checkpoint 6.3 P1. There is enough data out > there to indicate that a good percentage of your audience do browse with > scripts turned off, and there is also those out there with scripts turned > on, but with ad blockers installed to control or disable various sections of > the DOM, or using a modern browser that allows custom control over the DOM > and other media. If your site is "Dependant" on DHTML to operate, then I > don't see how it can comply with this checkpoint. Of course, the site isn't dependent on DHTML. How do you figure it is? Thanks, James -- http://www.cookiecrook.com/
Received on Tuesday, 23 September 2003 17:12:57 UTC