Re: is javascript considered good wacg 2.0 practice?

Hello, Karen and all,

> Karen Lewellen wrote:
> 
>> their Java script setup, but that they do not care because the use of 
>> Java Script WCAG 2.0 compliant...period.  few details, although indeed

It is important to note that WCAG 2.0 does not "allow" JavaScript as a 
whole (nor "prohibit" any technology as a whole). WCAG 2.0 always refers 
to "ways of using a technology".

This means that, if a particular technology is used to provide content, 
it must be used in an accessibility supported way. Saying that "WCAG 2.0 
allows JavaScript" as a excuse to create inaccessible JavaScript is like 
saying that "WCAG 2.0 allows HTML" and then using images without alt, 
inputs without label, no headings, no lists, empty titles, etc.


David wrote:

> It is important for WCAG guideline drafters to understand that most 
> businesses treat accessibility something like paying tax, i.e. something 
> they have to do to stay legal, but something where the legislation needs 
> to be scrutinised for loopholes, to minimise their need to actively 
> comply.  The spirit of WCAG guidelines will not be followed, only the 
> letter.

Even if the Success Criteria would not cover all the accessibility 
barriers, I don't think that its letter allows inaccessible content. I 
would argue that the letter of WCAG 2.0 has also 4 Principles that must 
be satisfied to comply with the Recommendation. Success Criteria are the 
"testable" part, but I would say that the Principles must be met to 
comply with WCAG 2.0.

In any case, I think that in this case it is just a metter of 
misinterpreting the idea of "allowing a technology".

Regards,
Ramón.

Received on Monday, 17 December 2012 10:26:51 UTC