Hi, I really enjoyed reading this thread, especially the responses
from Georg and Breton, and thank you Dwain for asking the question.
I have heard a lot about unobtrusive js but thus far it's more like a
buzzword to me because I understand no JS.
Can one recommend which JS library is more accessibility user-friendly
(is there such word?!). I know the jquery, mootool, prototype, Dojo,
Extjs, YUI libraries, and have recently used the jquery for accordion
menu and prototype for glider (sliding gallery like the one in
Panic.com), but I don't know enough to settle for one that is
relatively small size and unobtrusive. Everybody claims he is
unobtrusive, and I have difficulty to settle down with one.
Thanks!
tee
On Feb 24, 2008, at 4:56 AM, Gunlaug Sørtun wrote:
dwain wrote:
if accessibility isn't cracked up to what it's supposed to be, then
why are there laws about the subject?
The laws are probably there to prevent "accessibility" from falling
through the cracks. Consciously or unconsciously ignoring "access for
all" is after all more the norm than the exception, and that has to
change.
The two levels of accessibility have been mention.
- The first level, where access to content and functionality should be
guaranteed on a "technical" level, is not much of a problem. Basic
understanding of how to build a site is all that's required to reach
that level.
The "challenged" user-groups I ask for advice, expect me to meet
them at
that level - which is (slowly being) required by law for public
sites in
my country anyway.
- The second level, where some kind of optimizing for specific
user-groups and their hardware/software solutions has to take place,
is
of course harder.
I'm being told *not to go there* by the same "challenged" user-groups,
as "more accessible solutions for smaller groups" may end up being
tied to some weak end-user solutions that should rather be
upgraded/replaced and brought in line with the "technical" level
most of
them are comfortable with. They work for improvements and solutions
that
are tailor-made to the individual's needs - at their end, based on
common delivery-methods and techniques that can be made to work for
all
- as long as we developers/designers don't get in their way.
A requirement for common delivery-methods and techniques is being
introduced by law in my country now anyway - for public sites, which
should mean solutions at the user-end will make the need for "more
accessible" solutions at our end a non-issue over time - in Norway.
What kind of "leveling" that is missing/introduced/necessary in other
parts of the world is somewhat unknown to me, but providing accessible
solutions on a "technical" level - and pretty much limit it to that,
is
the only common and sensible approach if we want some progress, IMO.
Promoting the need for accessible solutions on a "technical" level on
top of existing and future web standards, should keep us busy enough
for
quite a while.
regards
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
