yesterday on #a11y 10:31 < adel> hey, I need a little help, I am building javascript widgets, am doing my best making the widgets accessible, currently I use W3C's ARIA documents, dojo are doing the same but unlike dojo, I only care (the accessible thing) about GNOME and its technology, is ARIA the best approach to make dynamic web site accessible to GNOME users? and how do I test those ARIA roles on GNOME?
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 5:40 PM, Willie Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm retitling this because I was just deleting GSOC mail -- my inbox is > flooding and I needed to do some drastic filtering. Many thanks to > Behdad for seeing this message and thinking of me. :-) > > For HTML accessibility, the best support is provided by the Gecko engine > that's in Firefox 3. We've worked very closely with Mozilla on this > work, and we have pretty decent support for emerging web technologies > like AJAX/ARIA/LiveRegions as a result. It was a VERY significant effort. > > If anyone is doing any sophisticated presentation of web content, I'd > really recommend they use the Gecko engine that FF3 uses, and I'm happy > to hear this is on the Yelp radar screen. I just cannot imagine the > effort it will take to add full a11y support to some other HTML widget. > > Will > > Shaun McCance wrote: > > On Thu, 2008-02-28 at 08:18 -0500, Luis Villa wrote: > >> One followup, one other suggestion, one followup. > >> On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 2:49 PM, Luis Villa<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> * "widgets": Vista, OSX, and KDE4 all have widgets/gadgets/Kthingies > >>> that are pretty, very easy to use, very easy to develop (since they > >>> are web-based), and which display more information when needed while > >>> staying hidden when not needed (both unlike our panel applets.) Some > >>> work has already been done on doing this with gtk-webkit[1]- perhaps > >>> that could be built on? (It seems to me that from a user perspective > >>> this approach is really superior to applets and what we should be > >>> focusing on long-term instead of reworking applets, but YMMV.) > >> Both screenlets and gdesklets have been pointed out to me offlist. I > >> was aware of both of them, but I didn't mention them here because I > >> don't think writing our own custom widgets is the way to go- we should > >> (at least to start) join the html-based widget bandwagon everyone else > >> is already on so that we can benefit from that base of applications. > >> Perhaps adding HTML widget support to one of them is the right thing, > >> though. > > > > Given that the Foundation has just earmarked US$50,000 for > > accessibility-related bounties, I'm curious how HTML widgets > > fare with accessibility. I often hear that dynamic web 2.0 > > applications are suboptimal in terms of accessiblity, and > > this would naturally translate to suboptimal accessibility > > in HTML widgets. > > > > I'd be very interested to see an analysis from one of our > > accessibility experts on this subject. > > > > -- > > Shaun > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > desktop-devel-list mailing list > > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list > > _______________________________________________ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list > _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list