- From: Allan Beaufour <beaufour@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 13:03:13 +0200
- To: "Stefano Debenedetti" <ste@demaledetti.net>
- Cc: www-forms@w3.org
On 5/5/06, Stefano Debenedetti <ste@demaledetti.net> wrote: > > Erik Bruchez ha scritto: > > > > Stefano Debenedetti wrote: > > > >> Considering that the interpretation commonly given to WCAG1.0-based > >> accessibility laws, at least in italy, is that you cannot provide > >> functionality via script unless same functionality is provided > >> without script too, I wonder how can server-side implementations > >> ever comply, let alone without requiring an insane number of page > >> reloads, thus completely defeating another stated goal of XForms, > >> which was also helping accessibility under another aspect. > > > > You will have to excuse my ignorance here, but it may be useful if > > people in the know would help us implementors understand better > > accessibility questions as they relate to XForms and script. > > I do sympathize, associate and concur with your apologies and wish, I feel pretty much in the same way as you, given that I have worked on at least two fully client-side, fully scripted XForms implementations and I still don't know when will I be able to use them without being dubbed of inaccessibility by design. I am in the same league, and that's my experience too. As soon as "script" is uttered, a11y alarm bells seems to go off. But I have no clue to whether it is feasible to get it to comply with a11y requirements (and/or laws) of today? Anyone have a spare "summon a11y experts"-spell handy? ;-) [On a sidenote, I am sad to see this turn into a religious "discussion". It totally misses my point. I explicitly wrote _today_ in the subject. For that, I do not care about script/no-script, intentions of XForms, etc. Fact is that browsers do not have XForms support built in now, so server-side processors (or other transformation, ie. FormFaces) are necessary for many projects.] -- ... Allan
Received on Monday, 8 May 2006 11:03:17 UTC