Ah, I was hoping someone besides me would say this, Lucy (quoted below)! Thank you for this and a similar post earlier in the thread. In that post, if I recall correctly, you mentioned the RNIB -- one of my favorite resources on web accessibility issues. I highly recommend them to everyone interested in the subject.
http://www.rnib.org.uk/ I'd refine and elaborate on what you say just a little, Lucy, but I admire your brevity. The HTML/XHTML protocol includes well established and tested criteria for delivering most essential content. So for web design (this may or may not apply to intranets and other closed systems such as applications), stick as closely as possible to a core design that adheres to these well-worn standards of quickly delivering the goods. Having done that, or simultaneous to that, enhance the design with javascript, CSS and other technologies that provide added value but do not interfere with the primary delivery system. In the simplest terms, that's the only requirement for accessibility. Section 508 compliance is rather easy if you can do this much. Javascript *can* interfere, but it is possible to create a javascript-intensive site that is pretty darned accessible. From the standpoint of accessibility, the problem goes a little deeper than saying yes or no to scripts. Key words from Lucy: "when there is no fallback." We should burn those words into our collective memory. I think we have to look at the end user's return on investment as well, and ask ourselves whether the time and code consumed in delivery is more than the delivered content deserves -- but that has to do with more than accessibility. You can also substitute the word "bandwidth" for the word "attention" in Herbert Simon's famous words below: <blockquote>"What information consumes is rather obvious: it consumes the attention of its recipients. Hence a wealth of information creates a poverty of attention, and a need to allocate that attention efficiently among the overabundance of information sources that might consume it." ... Herbert Simon</blockquote> Web standards are based on a number of essential assertions, thanks to Tim Berners-Lee and a lot of other Very Smart People who helped him and Al Gore invent the Internet. One of those assertions is that the end user has a right to control his/her experience with this technology. The problem with javascript and Flash and lots of other stuff is that they can be used, maliciously or not, to seize that control. As more people abuse these tools to pop up advertising or anything else unexpected, more people will turn them off by default -- not because they're Luddites, but because they are asserting their right not to be diverted somewhere they didn't want to go. Unless something changes drastically, Lucy's example of corporate firewalls is going to be the rule one day rather than the exception, as we practice due diligence in protecting our networks. Also, because I've heard a lot of whining about this elsewhere, I'll add: People who use screen readers and other assistive technologies have no choice in the matter, so they aren't turning off scripts just to deny you your God-given right to deliver your brilliant Design. Get over that. Traditional designers hate this way of thinking because presentation is EVERYTHING. Good web designers (and here creeps in my opinion) recognize that it's just part of the game plan. Added function and enhanced presentation are fine if they don't impede the underlying function of the delivery system, but *please* don't shove 'em down my throat. I won't go into all the reasons why to make the effort to re-think accessibility. In the end, it's going to come down to whether you want to sell to the whole market or a piece of it. Disability of one kind or another is inevitable with age, and statistically the current populations of the world's most affluent nations are weighted more toward the latter part of life. A significant part of the wealth is concentrated there, too, as these people have saved for their later years. And so on. We deny them at our own peril. Jeff Seager > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2007 07:23:25 +0000 > Subject: Re: [IxDA Discuss] Interesting tab navigation example > > I've nothing against javascript per se, in fact some of my favourite > sites use it... as they say ;D I love some of the uses like checking > username availability or password strength on the fly but have issue > when there is no fall back. > > Its not just to do with visually impaired people and browser agents > that could handle things better. Corporate firewalls are also a > random problem for people accessing sites that rely upon javascript. > see http://tinyurl.com/yhcr7o for examples. > > I like to approach programming in a similar manner to many of the > designers on this discussion list. White space is good. Brevity is > good. The less you write the less you have to debug and maintain. The > HTML protocol includes well established and well tested form > submission so unless this javascript adds something I would ask why > reinvent the wheel? _________________________________________________________________ The best games are on Xbox 360. Click here for a special offer on an Xbox 360 Console. http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/wheretobuy/ ________________________________________________________________ *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
