> -----Original Message----- > From: Andy Budd > Sent: Saturday, 31 July 2004 2:10 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [WSG] Fixed vs flexible layouts > > > Some very interesting discussion point here. > > I think the topic of fixed vs flexible layouts tends to cover a number > of areas. > > - Accessibility > - Usability > - Device Independence > - Personal Preference > - User Control
These principles are pretty well executed in desktop GUIs. The developer really does not have to do anything other than follow the SDK and APIs and the application should deploy correctly addressing these requirements, because there features are in the domain of the operating system to manage the application correctly. There are some things the application developer has to do, they have to work with the GetSystemMetrics() information and display according to that, that is mainly working with the resolution the software is running under, and other user preferences. These are the same principles that have been used to develop WCAG. Unfortunately the developers of user agents have either in their ignorance, or by choice, or the need to be quick to market, ignored many of the principles and standards required to build user agents correctly. Some of it is just poor software architecture. If feel there is constant need to expose the short comings in user agents, much like WASP did a few years back. There is a need to keep doing this, because, if we don't, it only makes web developers work more and more difficult, and user agents companies just become complacent. WCAG is not meant to make it hard for developers, it is really meant to try and help everyone, the user and the developer (ideal world again). The W3C people in this area do try and work with the user agent developers, but because they are W3C sponsors they cannot openly critise them. I have done so in shere frustration on those lists and I have been asked to refrain from open critisism on that forum. And I think that request is appropriate, it is not the place to express those things. But developer forums are. It would be great to see some kind of wiki set up so that developers could put data into a public forum addressing user agent compliance with standards, see; http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2001/10/eval http://cita.rehab.uiuc.edu/wai-eval/index.php?option=Test%20Suites http://cita.rehab.uiuc.edu/wai-eval/index.php?option=Evaluations http://www.maccessibility.com/archive/000595.php If anyone thinks such a site to lobby all the user agent developers would be a good idea, please contact me off list. Also, if you think it is not a good idea, I'd also appreciate such informed feedback. > Many people quite understandably end up mixing these issues together. > For instance, if you create a fixed width layout and then reduce the > browser so that the viewport is smaller than the layout width, you are > going to get scroll bars. The same thing happens if you create an > elastic layout and up the font size too much. However surely these are > more usability issues than accessibility issues. > > People often bring up the question of mobile phones and PDA's but where > does accessibility end and platform independence begin? Many mobile > developers would argue that you should be developing specially for > mobile devices as the needs of the users and limitations of the medium > are very different to that of computer screens. While it's an > idealistic goal, it's probably unrealistic to develop once then deploy > across all internet enabled devices. > > Personal preference is a bit of a red herring. It seems that as many > people like fixed width layouts as they dislike them. > > Pretty much all these areas have been covered here, and elsewhere, yet > I'm still left feeling that we've not had a definitive reason why fixed > layouts are bad for *accessibility*, only personal opinion. Probably > because accessibility is a subjective concept that, at certain times, > can include all the other areas I've mentioned. > This is a fundemental HCI principle that is applied well in the major operating systems. If you read any of the following you will begin to see how these common threads type HCI principles together, and why this is also important on the web and for user agents to comply with these parameters in handling instructions, so that web developers can better support usability and accessibility in their designs. http://developer.apple.com/documentation/MacOSX/Conceptual/AppleSWDesign/HID esign/chapter_3_section_1.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP30000353 http://developer.apple.com/documentation/MacOSX/Conceptual/AppleSWDesign/ind ex.html?http://developer.apple.com/documentation/MacOSX/Conceptual/AppleSWDe sign/HIDesign/chapter_3_section_3.html http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/vsent7/html /vxconAccessibilityDesignGuidelines.asp http://developer.gnome.org/projects/gup/hig/ http://developer.gnome.org/projects/gup/hig/draft_hig_new/ http://www-306.ibm.com/able/guidelines/software/swreferences.html -- Geoff Deering ***************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *****************************************************
