Fortunately, getting alternate content about the image to the user is a
no-brainer.
It will become a matter of making sure your markup has the appropriate
attributes (title, alt, longdesc) and add your javascript afterwards.
I haven't gone back and picked through the lightbox .js code to see if
it runs all the tests it should before running the effect, but I have a
feeling that a nice series of tests like:
--------------
if (document.getElementById) {
- or -
if (something a little more complex that a browser would handle but
screenreader would not) {
----------------------------
might result in the effect only running if javascript is fully (or
mostly) supported.
The optimal solution would probably add in the typical 'rel=lightbox[]'
to the images during the load events, so screenreaders would hopefully
not encounter it at all. At this point the 'rel' attribute is actually
going into the markup. This is pretty easy to work around thanks to the
DOM.
Again, a good understanding of JAWS javascript limits/support is
essential to come up with the solution. I myself was unable to find a
definitive list of events/calls that are supported/unsupported beyond
some testing of the 'onmouseover' attribute....
Joseph R. B. Taylor
http://sitesbyjoe.com
Brad Pollard wrote:
Steve,
You mentioned that lightbox implementations are not accessible in that JAWs
does not read any of the displayed content.... I see this as a real problem
as the "new approach" to displaying images etc has been to use lightbox or
something similar.
Joe, it would be good to know whether setting focus makes a difference to
JAWs.
Anyone else got any ideas? I agree popups (in the traditional target=blah)
is an approach that should not be used for many reasons. So how do we tell
screenreaders a) to ignore the lightbox javascript and follow the href, OR
b) that new content is being displayed?
A great conversation this one. Will it end?
~ brad
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Price" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 9:15 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Compliant pop ups
Joseph R. B. Taylor wrote:
You're right, many people do request them, but this is typically based
on past experience and believing that a popup is the only solution.
As the developer, its your job to either a) do what ever the client
wants, including using popups, or b) advise them of the pitfalls of
the technique.
From the other replies on this thread it would appear that, though
there are pitfalls with the pop-up, its not clear that there is an
adequate alternative.
Is there more lateral thinking required here? It seems like the cleverer
you get with your techniques the more potential hoops there are to jump
through.
If its hard to find an answer, maybe I'm asking the wrong question.
Should the question be:
'Do you have an accessible solution that satisfies all or most of the
requirements that are met by the use of a pop-up in a given situation'?
Kind Regards
--
Joseph R. B. Taylor
*Sites by Joe, LLC*
/Custom Web Design & Development/
http://sitesbyjoe.com
(609) 335-3076
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
begin:vcard
fn:Joseph R. B. Taylor
n:Taylor;Joseph
org:Sites by Joe, LLC
adr:;;408 Route 47 South;Cape May Court House;NJ;08210;USA
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
tel;work:609-335-3076
tel;cell:609-335-3076
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://sitesbyjoe.com
version:2.1
end:vcard
