Section 508c regulations simply require that sites be accessable, it doesn't mean javascript can not be used. However, many elements commonly found in the nav items you made refference to often break these accessability standards. Javascript, like many other tools can be used in such a way that they do not break accessability standards and guidelines, they just often are not implemented in this way.
To us JS or not, is most often a choice of whoever is paying for the project. It is absolutely a requirement that I define clearly in defining my projects. To build the site without it, in general means an increased cost. In my case I have tons of standard JS validation libraries, and other common utilities I have to throw away and start coding server side alternatives to. In general though, I've had good success with requiring it 100% for intranet and authenticated modules, but make an effort to support JS being disabled on truely public elements. The user's experience may be highly degraded without it, but the site would still be functional. I can't say if my experience here is the 'norm' in the field, and I'm sure others may disagree. Your results may vary ;) Good Luck. On 9/27/06, Bobby Hartsfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > All of that changes for govt. sites apparently. They are very strict on > accessibility and standards from what I hear. I would assume that means no > JS? > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting, up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four times a year. http://www.fusionauthority.com/quarterly Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/message.cfm/messageid:254534 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4
