- From: David Dorward <david@dorward.me.uk>
- Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 19:17:31 +0000
- To: "Haileselassie, Antonio O. (HQ-LM020)[InDyne, Inc]" <Antonio.O.Haileselassie@nasa.gov>
- Cc: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>, "M. Urban" <m.urban@trilliumjazz.com>
On 24 Mar 2008, at 19:06, Haileselassie, Antonio O. (HQ-LM020) [InDyne, Inc] wrote: >> Which results in a tiny target area for clicks. Labels on radio >> buttons and checkboxes are probably those which most benefit pointing >> device users. > > There isn't always one way to accomplish "accessibility" (<label> > tags) > and using this means is still accessible, but possibly lacks the > "usability" that some would prefer. Tell that to people with motor control related handicaps. >>> Which sections did you find to be JavaScript dependant? > >> Select element as navigation. > > I did find the quicklinks select element to be JavaScript dependent > and > this should definitely be avoided if not necessary. But, isn't WCAG > moving away from requiring JavaScript to be disabled? Assuming you mean "Requiring sites to function with JavaScript disabled", I gather that it is. It isn't something I agree with. The current specification (WCAG 1.0) is quite clear though: "Ensure that pages are usable when scripts, applets, or other programmatic objects are turned off or not supported." -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/
Received on Monday, 24 March 2008 19:18:15 UTC