RE: [WSG] Bobby question
My next question is for e.g. using the style switcher js from ALA, or whichever js written by programmers for your website. Will you change the all commands to satisfy the priority even if the script is non-applicable to lynx users? PS: Can you see better now Peter? This just make me realise that with all the concentration for accessibility on websites, I forgot about others :P Good wakeup call. With Regards Jaime Wong ~~ SODesires Design Team http://www.sodesires.com ~~ ---Original Message--- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 03/07/04 09:54:45 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [WSG] Bobby question Hi Jaime, Yes it's very important. Many differently-abled people don't use a mouse. They use the keyboard to navigate around a page/site (generally much faster and more efficiently than any mouse user). By using onclick or onmousedown etc. you may be blocking their access to whatever the resource is. Having said that, something like: will still work ok as the default behaviour of the href will generally be used anyway. Best thing to do is put the mouse under your desk and navigate with the keyboard alone and see what you can and cannot do on your site. Or, go to one of the Public Lynx access sites mentioned on http://www.subir.com/lynx/public_lynx.html with telnet://guest.sailor.lib.md.us/ being a good one. On Priority 1 or 2..I forgot which. There is this rule that states that one should not use onclick for _javascript_. The problem is that most programmers uses onclick and other actions that requires mouse. Do you guys try to satisfy this rule? I was thinking if I got to satisfy that rule, this means that I have to mess around with all the _javascript_s. This thought puts me off. Please try to use plain text email for this list as your email colours are very difficult for me (colour-blind) to read. A hint to all. You should (with a decent email client) be able to set it to send palin text only based on the address [EMAIL PROTECTED]. This should throw a warning if you try to send html email. P * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ * .
RE: [WSG] Bobby question
Just found this : If the script cannot be made accessible one viable solution is to include a NOSCRIPT tag with alternative and equivalent content and interaction (via a form). What do they mean by the above? With Regards Jaime Wong ~~ SODesires Design Team http://www.sodesires.com ~~ ---Original Message--- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 03/07/04 16:33:41 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [WSG] Bobby question My next question is for e.g. using the style switcher js from ALA, or whichever js written by programmers for your website. Will you change the all commands to satisfy the priority even if the script is non-applicable to lynx users? PS: Can you see better now Peter? This just make me realise that with all the concentration for accessibility on websites, I forgot about others :P Good wakeup call. With Regards Jaime Wong ~~ SODesires Design Team http://www.sodesires.com ~~ ---Original Message--- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 03/07/04 09:54:45 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [WSG] Bobby question Hi Jaime, Yes it's very important. Many differently-abled people don't use a mouse. They use the keyboard to navigate around a page/site (generally much faster and more efficiently than any mouse user). By using onclick or onmousedown etc. you may be blocking their access to whatever the resource is. Having said that, something like: will still work ok as the default behaviour of the href will generally be used anyway. Best thing to do is put the mouse under your desk and navigate with the keyboard alone and see what you can and cannot do on your site. Or, go to one of the Public Lynx access sites mentioned on http://www.subir.com/lynx/public_lynx.html with telnet://guest.sailor.lib.md.us/ being a good one. On Priority 1 or 2..I forgot which. There is this rule that states that one should not use onclick for _javascript_. The problem is that most programmers uses onclick and other actions that requires mouse. Do you guys try to satisfy this rule? I was thinking if I got to satisfy that rule, this means that I have to mess around with all the _javascript_s. This thought puts me off. Please try to use plain text email for this list as your email colours are very difficult for me (colour-blind) to read. A hint to all. You should (with a decent email client) be able to set it to send palin text only based on the address [EMAIL PROTECTED]. This should throw a warning if you try to send html email. P * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ * .
Re: [WSG] turning back to the dark side...
Sorry for barging in here Michael. This is a bit OT, but I need to send you (Michael Donnermeyer) a PM to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. So if you see, From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please open it, as it will be in plain text format with no attachments added. I have already tried to email you, but received no reply, so I assume you either did not receive the original, or have maybe deleted it, as it was a cold call. Perhaps Michael, you could send me a quick PM to let me know that you will okay this? Sorry also to everyone on the WSG, for this little interuptive message. Regards, JG --- Michael Donnermeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: You actually expect Microsoft to create a product that works?!? How about one that follows standards? (RIGHT!) All kidding aside, it's a royal pain in the U know what and it'll probably result in 'pattern baldness' from ripping your own hair out, but in the long run it'll be worth it. It's about time for M$ to 'evolve' (or copy someone elses idea as their own) anyway. I doubt I'd ever go back, personally. MD On Mar 4, 2004, at 22:26, Paul Ross wrote: > > How > stupid are they over there in Redmond? We have had CSS1 since, what > 1996/97 and > 8 years down the track (that's 734 internet years) and IE is still > blundering > about like a drunken bull in a china shop. * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ * _ Why Pay $35 for a .COM, .NET or .ORG Web Address? iDotz.Net offers Cool Domains @ Great Prices! Starting @ $8.75 Go: http://www.idotz.net * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
RE: [WSG] Bobby question
Hi Jaime, A tag is read only when JavaScript isn't present (except in Netscape 4 as I recall but may have been Netscape 3 which shows both the script and the noscript content and this was when it WAS the dominant browser! Someone may like to check that but I can't be bothered as I never use it any more). So you would have something like: Something else if JS not available. Much like . A search for on Google brings up everything you need to know in the first 5 links. However, for something like onclick this doesn't work. The best thing to do is test it in Lynx and make sure the default behaviour of the link or button still works. If you're doing something else with onclick (than a form element or link) then you may well have to rethink it. Remember, Google (the worlds biggest blind user) may not be able to follow it if it is inaccessible so your pages may remain hidden to the world. As for the other question (below), much the same answer. However, when we do it, if you don't have JavaScript turned on, you simply don't get the styleswitcher links at all as they wouldn't work anyway. If you do have JavaScript, and you tab to the link and hit enter, the appropriate behaviour is invoked. Again, see http://www.gt.nsw.gov.au/ and try throwing the mouse away and turning JavaScript off to see what happens. You just have to think about it carefully as you put it together and then test the pants off it. My next question is for e.g. using the style switcher js from ALA, or whichever js written by programmers for your website. Will you change the all commands to satisfy the priority even if the script is non-applicable to lynx users? PS: Can you see better now Peter? This just make me realise that with all the concentration for accessibility on websites, I forgot about others :P Good wakeup call. Yes thanks, but plain text beats it every time on a mail list :-) P * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
RE: [WSG] Bobby question
Thanks Peter for the wonderful explanation :) I tested it straight away but facing some problem with Strict DTD. This is what I have in my html
var d=new Date();
yr=d.getFullYear();
if (yr!=2003)
document.write("- "+yr);
- 2004! and dT();GMT +8 This is the errors Line 224, column 55: character data is not allowed here dT();GMT +8 ^Line 683, column 9: document type does not allow element "noscript" here; missing one of "object", "ins", "del", "map", "button" start-tag - 2004! ^Line 683, column 10: character data is not allowed here - 2004! With Regards Jaime Wong ~~ SODesires Design Team http://www.sodesires.com ~~ ---Original Message--- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 03/07/04 20:11:50 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [WSG] Bobby question Hi Jaime, A tag is read only when _javascript_ isn't present (except in Netscape 4 as I recall but may have been Netscape 3 which shows both the script and the noscript content and this was when it WAS the dominant browser! Someone may like to check that but I can't be bothered as I never use it any more). So you would have something like:
