- From: John Foliot - WATS.ca <foliot@wats.ca>
- Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 16:23:42 -0400
- To: "Joe Clark" <joeclark@joeclark.org>, "WAI-IG" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
> > > Again, I have yet to receive one example of client side scripts > solving a > > problem that cannot be solved alternatively and is fully accessible. > > "Again, I have yet to receive one example of CSS design solving a problem > that cannot be solved alternatively and is fully accessible." > > Someone here is really trying to get us to believe that JavaScript is > *eeevil*? How 1999. This guy must work on WCAG. > Well then Joe, give the guy the answer he seeks - one example of a client side script which solves a problem that cannot be done in a different, more accessible manner. If you cannot, then your position cannot be defended - put up or .... It's not that JavaScript itself is evil, only indiscriminate usage of it is. Too often we see poor to horrid uses of JavaScript which cause usability/accessibility issues - and this you cannot deny. So Steven simply asks - put forward a good reason to encourage and maintain client side scripting. Once this has been defended (if it can be) we need to ensure that good, accessible examples exist so that the teaching mandate of WCAG may be advanced. <challenge> But don't just sit there and say you know better 'cause you wrote a book. Defend your response - these one-line toss offs do nothing for any of us. </challenge> JF -- John Foliot foliot@wats.ca Web Accessibility Specialist / Co-founder of WATS.ca Web Accessibility Testing and Services http://www.wats.ca 1.866.932.4878 (North America)
Received on Wednesday, 2 June 2004 16:23:46 UTC