Re: Undoubtedly, an oversimplification ...

no but how does one get web developers to actually do it. especially when 
their bosses are pushing more and faster projects at them and the web is 
morphing almost daily.

anyone can write bad code.
just as anyone can use bad practicies

we know the problem, and issues

how do we encourage/educate/mandate accessible practices and usable 
websites for all.??

Bob


On Sat, 3 May 2014, Patrick H. Lauke wrote:

> Date: Sat, 03 May 2014 13:37:20 +0100
> From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
> To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Undoubtedly, an oversimplification ...
> Resent-Date: Sat, 03 May 2014 12:37:44 +0000
> Resent-From: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> 
> On 03/05/2014 09:35, David Woolley wrote:
>> You should count me as a
>> non-Javascript person, but I now have it enabled by default because it
>> is impracticable to use the modern web without it.  As such, your survey
>> would have recorded me as pro-Javascript.
>
> And as such, you will have no problems with a site that DOES use JavaScript, 
> but according to best practices and producing accessible output with 
> judicious use of ARIA and semantic markup...
>
> The technology is not the problem in most cases. It's perfectly feasible to 
> make completely inaccessible sites with nothing but pure HTML - just stick 
> everything into one big image, like back in the 90s. Now, as then, it's not a 
> case of blaming the tech, but rather pushing for more developer awareness and 
> understanding. Sweeping statements about JavaScript/modern websites/AJAX/etc 
> being bad, inaccessible, or just disliked, do not really help move the issue 
> further.
>
> P
> -- 
> Patrick H. Lauke
>
> www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
> http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
> twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
>

Received on Saturday, 3 May 2014 14:44:31 UTC