Who's responsible (was Re: [WSG] add to favorites?)
On 3/25/09 12:12 PM, Rick Faircloth r...@whitestonemedia.com wrote: The correct design (and web standards that are adhered to or not) is that design for which the client is paying. Sorry, but that just reads to me like a way to excuse slipshod work. It is one thing to figure out any old way to collect the check, and quite another to think out all the angles and produce something that reaches the largest possible audience. I think the latter is far more professional, and all of the people I now work with, and all the ones I think of as successful in web design/dev, sweat those details. I've personally refused jobs before based on the knowledge that accessibility was being left out. So I know it can be done. Whether others would do the same is a question of their own judgment, not their professionalism. A standard could be imposed on all concerned that would make driving accessible to the blind...it certainly is technically possible...however, the cost is simply too high to make that a reality. First off, no, it's not possible. The technology doesn't exist today, or we'd all have self-driving cars already. Though what this has to do with pragmatic accessibility for web pages, which is generally a low-cost proposition for most of what's out there, is beyond me. Making content more accessible is not a boil-the-ocean strategy. Most of the basics for web accessibility take little work, and are easy to integrate into the average dev's everyday tasks. The only time it can be really costly is when it's been ignored the whole time the work was being done. Likewise (...in that they are both referenced sequentially in one email...) site owners may be under time and monetary restraints that prohibit making their websites accessible to all. Or they may just choose not to...again, it's the boss's choice, not the designer's. So, let me boil this down: web accessibility is like blind people driving. Wow. I think the only thing they may have in common is your willingness to contemplate them as an implementer. Which is fine, in and of itself. I'm not the boss of you. But if you're trying to equate the task of following a few best practices with reinventing the world's transportation infrastructure, well, good luck with that. - m *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] macpro and softwares..
Try ies4osx. I haven't, but have heard it works: http://www.kronenberg.org/ies4osx/ As for software, I'm partial to Dreamweaver. And Contribute. And Flex Builder. :) But I've also heard good things about Aptana, and I've been happy with TextWrangler, which did all I used BBEdit for, free. - m On 3/5/09 10:32 AM, Naveen Bhaskar naveenbhas...@ymail.com wrote: Hi, I used to work in a windows system and now I am working in a macbook pro. how can I test my webpages for IE. Is there any IE installers available for mac? Also pls let me know what are the softwares available for a UI developer for Mac. thanks a ton in advance.. thanks and regards Naveen Bhaskar cell: +91.9740082166 Bangalore navidesigns http://www.cpluv.com/navidesigns/ Check out the all-new Messenger 9.0! Click here. http://in.rd.yahoo.com/tagline_messenger_7/*http://in.messenger.yahoo.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] Javascript Accessibility
As someone who's on the working group producing ARIA, I have to say the editors have done a pretty remarkable job in terms of documenting a specification that hasn't even advanced past Working Draft. First, there's the spec itself: http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/ Then there's the User Agent Implementation Guide, for browser developers to follow: http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-implementation/ And the Best Practices Guide, for authors: http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-practices/ In addition, Steve Faulkner, also in the PFWG, has done lots of writing on the subject: http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/?cat=23 And Universal Design for Web Applications, the book I co-wrote with Wendy Chisholm, has a more basic introductory chapter on ARIA. The point is, it may not all have a W3C banner at the top, but generally speaking, W3C is more responsible for being complete and precise, than being prosaic. I expect that the Web Standards Curriculum is most likely to have author-friendly material on ARIA, and that's only when the spec is stable enough for general consumption. - m On 3/1/09 6:32 AM, David Dixon da...@terrainferno.net wrote: although the WAI ARIA team (as with the W3C in general) need to start producing more palatable documentation rather than just having huge technical manuals on the subject. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] Javascript Accessibility
On 3/2/09 2:02 AM, Mathew Robertson mat...@optusnet.com.au wrote: Its been possible to do ARIA style accessibility since about 1995 - its just now that people are starting to care. Not sure what value you were hoping to add to the conversation, but MSAA, the Windows accessibility API, didn't come out until April 1997. And that much of what ARIA has to offer is actually enabled by the IAccessible2 or User Interface Automation APIs, which are much more recent and comprehensive. ARIA is a very ambitious spec, and a number of companies contributing to its support in a very short period of time, relative to the work that's necessary. But, thanks for the cynicism! We don't get enough of that on the Internet these days. :) - m *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] The notion of accessibility [was: Javascript Accessibility]
On 3/2/09 3:15 PM, Hassan Schroeder has...@webtuitive.com wrote: Matt Morgan-May wrote: Look at the Atlas project that was unveiled this week, as an example. ref? http://www.280atlas.com/ One of the developers is actually talking about ARIA right now: http://rossboucher.com/2009/03/01/limitations-of-the-wai-aria/ - m *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] Implication of empty divs
Andy's technically correct, and it's true that pointing to the main content of the document is good for accessibility, though not because of semantics so much as that you can point to it in a Skip to main content link. id='mainContent' doesn't communicate any semantics by itself. (That's something they're working on in HTML5: establishing roles for main content, etc.) The real problem with div is the affliction known as div-itis, where block elements which could express semantics and/or which already have default layout properties (like blockquote) are ignored in favor of div. (Div-itis is also strongly correlated with span-itis, which is really more like a plague.) - m On 2/10/09 3:22 PM, Ben Lau bensan...@gmail.com wrote: From the CSS Mastery Advanced Web Standards Solutions book by Andy Budd, and I quote: Many people mistakenly believe that a div element has no semantic meaning. However div actually stands for division and provides a way of dividing a document into meaningful areas. So by wrapping your main content area in a div and giving it an ID of mainContent, you are adding structure and meaning to your document. But as far as i know, screen readers do not pick up IDs or classes? So even by declaring a div ID=mainNav, it's still not enough to describe what's inside the div? I'm starting to get awfully confused... *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] PDFs and other non-html files opening in a new browser window
On 2/5/09 1:30 PM, Carolyn Diaz carolyn.d...@gmail.com wrote: I know this is an old school type question, but we are very divided about this. The people on our usability team are with Nielsen, but others (like me) are not so sure. Isn't accessibility to new windows a problem as it changes the focus? What do you think? I think you're better off loading the PDF in the same window. If a user prefers to load PDFs in another window, it's likely that they want to load it into Adobe Reader rather than an IE wrapper of the Reader plugin. Users with that preference can use Reader's accessibility wizard to configure all PDFs to be opened in Reader. As far as accessibility is concerned, the big issue with opening new windows is actually with windows being opened involuntarily, e.g. popups. (Even then, it's only a Level AAA requirement in WCAG 2.) Using target on links is not a problem--anymore. And, what Lachlan said about marking PDF documents as PDFs. :) - m *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: # Re: [WSG] Beta Testers Needed for BCAT
On 1/14/09 5:38 AM, Christie Mason cma...@managersforum.com wrote: Plus, I'd be curious as to availability of the Flex server in remote hosts. I haven't seen any offer it, is it still so pricey(?), but I also haven't been looking for it. Flex hasn't been sold on a server basis since 1.5, which was released in 2004. Flex 3 was released as an open-source SDK, along with a commercial, Eclipse-based IDE called Flex Builder (which, btw, is free for educational users--as is ColdFusion). - m *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] Re: WSG Digest
On 1/10/09 8:26 AM, Alan C Whiteman acwhite...@visualis.us wrote: In the end, Flash is not only an obnoxious medium in 90% of its usage ...which is not a problem owing to the platform but rather its authors... (Besides, that's consistent with Sturgeon's Law: 90% of everything is crap.) it's technically bad for SEO. ...which isn't generally germane to learning management systems, given that their users tend to be inside an intranet to begin with. In any case, Google (among other engines) does in fact index Flash content, and has a list of guidelines for doing so: http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2008/06/improved-flash-indexing.h tml But if we don't have people pushing that envelope, doesn't that make that statement self-fulfilling prophecy? As a proprietary technology, Adobe can have the burden of making its technology better and more compliant. You mean like settling on industry-standard audio and video formats, like MP3 and H.264? We do that. SCORM support for our e-Learning products? That too. Hey, maybe we could open-source the Flex language, including its compiler: http://opensource.adobe.com/flex Whether that adds up to better or not isn't up to me to say. But it's not the same platform it was 5 years ago, to be sure. Unfortunately, it's usually argued over as though it were. Thanks, m *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: # Re: [WSG] Beta Testers Needed for BCAT
On 1/12/09 2:20 AM, michael.brocking...@bt.com michael.brocking...@bt.com wrote: Quote: The fact is that many educators have found that they can use Flash to teach their students effectively. I think you (and those teachers that you refer to) are mistaking an effective lesson, for effective teaching.* [...] * It may be easier to teach people to use Flash to get a particular result, but at the end of the day they have not learned what they need to know, which is that Flash is Evil. If evil is all you have to say about Flash, then there's not much that can be said. It's clearly not worth taking a reasoned approach to convince you that it has merit as a classroom tool, despite the thousands of teachers and millions of students using it. Also, I think you mis-understand where the problem lies. Because of the way that Flash works, almost all of it is inaccessible to assistive technology. I have to challenge that assertion, as the engineer who's principally responsible for improving the accessibility of Flash. Having followed Flash accessibility since it was first introduced (in 2002), I can tell you that it has improved dramatically since that time, to the extent that I'd argue accessible RIA development in Flash today is more efficient (and definitely better-supported) than the same work done in Ajax. ARIA will help Ajax get to where we are today, but then Ajax authors will be in the same situation: most of them failing, usually unconsciously, to produce accessible applications by default. When that's the case, will you blame Ajax, or its frameworks, or the individual authors? Will Ajax be evil? Adobe could do a better job, the makers of assistive technology could do a better job Great. I'm all ears. What should we do? So far, the impression that I get is that we should give up. Flash being evil and all. But since we continue to improve our accessibility, please feel free to send me your ideas. but there is very little that the man in the middle can do This is the heart of the matter. It's just not true. Flash authors can do a lot to be directly accessible to assistive technology. And bringing it all back to the original message here, that's what BCAT's developers are trying to do. What's wrong with more people producing more accessible Flash content, other than you disliking Flash? - M *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
# Re: [WSG] Beta Testers Needed for BCAT
Hi, Excuse me for jumping in here, especially (in this case) as a Flash partisan. But I fail to see how this kind of project can be anything other than a good thing overall. What I don't understand is why people are instantly critical of projects that are actually attempting to increase access to new technology. I've heard a constant drumbeat of don't use Flash: it's inaccessible in the years I've been involved in the field. But if we don't have people pushing that envelope, doesn't that make that statement self-fulfilling prophecy? There are lots of us out there working on improving the accessibility of both existing and future content authored in Flash. There are many arguments to be made for HTML -- I made loads of them while working for W3C, all of which I would stand by today -- but it is not all things to all people. The fact is that many educators have found that they can use Flash to teach their students effectively. I'm not an educator by profession, but my wife is, and she prefers Flash over HTML/CSS/JS to develop her courseware. If you were to tell her she's wrong, especially before seeing what kind of work she does, I think you'd probably find yourself dodging a couple shelves' worth of education texts. Telling a professional their tools are wrong is not the most endearing of approaches. In my opinion, the best one can do is to learn what they're doing, and offer ways to make that output more efficient, more inclusive, and easier to produce. Teachers aren't usually web developers, and we shouldn't want them to be. So I'm all for companies taking on the technical problems so teachers can be teachers, and so on. Thanks, M Accessibility Engineer, Adobe Christie Mason said: Exactly right. I've sadly watched Flash take over eLearning and still haven't figured out the attraction, except that it offers the control of PPT while appearing to be rich.There's only a very few types of web sites that still use Flash for delivering primary content - media sites, those that focus more on look at me instead of being a resource to their site guests, and eLearning. Since, supposedly, eLearning is about offering web based resources for learning it just doesn't make sense to me that it has ignored all the ways the web has supported, continues to support, learning w/o using Flash. Flash on the web is like cooking with garlic. A little adds depth, a lot is inedible. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
