At 10/26/2006 06:31 PM, Thierry Koblentz wrote:
IMO, the goal should be to deliver the *cleanest* document possible, with the least amount of structural hack, hook, etc.
You mean like 40 lines of JavaScript to morph the markup of a 16-item list?
In the example I posted, one can't get cleaner than that. The only issue I see is that screen-readers end up with a table.
Oops. Isn't accommodating non-visual user agents one of the primary reasons we're trying to drag the world wide web off that old table jones?
To be fair, though, using JavaScript to change semantic markup into arbitrary glop for the sake of presentation doesn't necessitate the use of tables; that was just the way you built this particular demo. You could have simply split the list into two pieces and floated them left.
http://www.tjkdesign.com/test/ on top of that, it is possible to make the list display across different number of columns without having to edit the markup nor the stylesheet; actually, there is *no* stylesheet ;)
It gets better! No more pesky separation of structure from presentation from behavior! Now we can have them all neatly combined in a single file. How... compact!
Disabling the script is all what is needed for screen-readers to speak the links in the proper sequence.
So Jaws users have to disable your tool and all other JS helpers on the page in order to read the content in the proper sequence? I'm sorry, but how is this a step ahead?
Think about it... ;-)
I'm thinking mostly that you are one of the brighter lights in our firmament, and I love your ingenuity.
Paul At 10/26/2006 07:19 PM, Christian Montoya wrote:
3. How does this expect to deal with user agents that look at *generated source* and not original source?
******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *******************************************************************
