Re: Banning and Guidelines V Techniques

This is more or less exactly what my position is on the subject. I'm 
going to be working with a number of JavaScript developers in the next 
couple of weeks to work out example scripts which degrade gracefully or 
otherwise don't interfere with assistive technology. And then, we're 
going to test them, document them, and release the scripts freely. The 
View Source JavaScript developers will use whatever they can find that 
works, so we may as well give them something that meets our 
requirements.

(This is technically a top post. Joe will deal.)

-
m

On Jun 3, 2004, at 12:22 PM, Steven Dale wrote:
> I see arguements for banning and not banning client side scripts.  But 
> I
> think the issue can can be solved.  I believe most web designers when 
> told
> to be wary about using scripts and given examples of how to use them
> correctly and examples with factual based documentation on why some
> scripts break the accessibility issues, would do the correct approach.
>
> Do we want to ban scripting in the guidelines?  I think that 
> artifically
> closes the door.  I think the guidelines should say something such as
> "Scripts should be USED WITH CAUTION and must degrade gracefully in
> regards to the information presented/attained."  And leave it to that.
>
> NOW I think the techniques should be the crux of the work for the WCAG 
> WG
> where they can document AS MUCH AS THEY POSSIBLY CAN on best 
> practices, ok
> practices, and problem practices.  I think if there was an example of 
> how
> to do an accessible rollover, and people knew where to look for
> techniques, most would copy and implement the example.
>
> I think the time spent debating whether or not to ban this or that is a
> waste.  I think if you get enough examples of good and bad solutions to
> problems, it will become obvious.

Received on Friday, 4 June 2004 14:22:47 UTC