RE: Who's responsible (was Re: [WSG] add to favorites?)
The point of the introduction of Web standards was so that user-agent manufacturers can create browsers that render them as intended by the designer. And that, yes, in 10 years time the browsers that exist then (whatever form they may take)will still render them as intended because they are written to those standards. That is not to say that the standards are fixed in stone and that the Web will not move forward, but rather that the standards we will move forward in a coherent way to create a better and better user experience (rather than the proprietary mess we had pre-standards). I.E., whilst moving to support Web standards, has to provide support for legacy sites coded to their earlier proprietary mess. On Thu, March 26, 2009 1:19 am, Rick Faircloth wrote: Wow...10 years from now...as fast as change occurs these days, who knows what things will be like then! Rick -Original Message- From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org] On Behalf Of nedlud Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 8:58 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: Who's responsible (was Re: [WSG] add to favorites?) As I understand this thread, it is not about whether current standards are right or wrong, but how did we end up with these standards in the first place? The current standards did not just spring into existence, fully formed, out of the brow of some greek god. The standards evolved as peoples understanding of the web evolved. And the web itself was evolving at the same time, just as it continues to do. Just as the standards will continue to evolve. I'm certainly not saying that I disagree with current web standards, just that it would be foolish to think that they are *definitive*. As professionals, it is our responsibility to be reflective practitioners: to question the status quo and make sure it's really working. We can't do that without asking questions, or without listening to people who ask questions. The web is still an incredibly young medium and anyone who imagines that the standards we have today will apply to the web of tomorrow (I'm thinking of about a 10 year away tomorrow) would be naive. L. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
RE: Who's responsible (was Re: [WSG] add to favorites?)
-Original Message- From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org] On Behalf Of Matt Morgan-May Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 3:50 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Who's responsible (was Re: [WSG] add to favorites?) On 3/25/09 12:12 PM, Rick Faircloth r...@whitestonemedia.com wrote: The correct design (and web standards that are adhered to or not) is that design for which the client is paying. Sorry, but that just reads to me like a way to excuse slipshod work. It is one thing to figure out any old way to collect the check, and quite another to think out all the angles and produce something that reaches the largest possible audience. I think the latter is far more professional, and all of the people I now work with, and all the ones I think of as successful in web design/dev, sweat those details. You seem to assume that no one took the steps to create other options or inform in these situations. I have. And I've been told no go, do it my way or the highway. Not everyone is reasonable about things like that. Some people insist they know it all and persist with ridiculous demands that are often non-standards compliant and downright ugly. Regardless of the alternatives they've been handed. I've dealt with some moronic requests when it comes to websites, from people that know nothing about it. I'm sure we all have at some point. I've personally refused jobs before based on the knowledge that accessibility was being left out. So I know it can be done. Whether others would do the same is a question of their own judgment, not their professionalism. It's good that you have the luxury to be able to make that call. The reality is that not everyone is in a position, financially or otherwise. Yes, it can be done. It is simply not always practical. That said, I'm in a position where I typically do get to call the shots. I want standards compliance. Every design is blood and sweat because I'm not compromising. But to get where I am, I had to put up with a lot of hideous nonsense along the way. I'm not saying let's just toss standards out the window. I'm just saying that the reality is that sometimes we're stuck with compromise, or worse, we don't even get to compromise. Learning how to balance conflicting requirements, or how to offer alternatives in some cases, strikes me as a valuable tool to advance the cause of usability and accessibility. As with any cause, sometimes advancement and education of the masses involves babysteps and doing what we can. Speaking of doing what we can: anyone taken a good look at whitehouse.gov? While they've made some great strides in modernizing the site, its sorely lacking in basic accessibility. For starters: fixed font sizes. I filled out the comment form to give feedback on the subject. If more of us piped up, it could benefit. Janice *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
RE: Who's responsible (was Re: [WSG] add to favorites?)
First off, no, it's not possible. The technology doesn't exist today, or we'd all have self-driving cars already. It is possible...there's just not sufficient will and money to make it a widespread reality. But that's another topic for another day... Anyway...the first time you are forced to compromise your work in a way that even itches a little, I want you to walk out and leave that pay check behind right there. Continue that walk and wait until you get hungry enough and some of those vaunted principles will be tossed aside like so much waste. Like you said, accessibility is *generally* a low-cost proposition. But, in many cases, complete accessibility can drive the cost of a site 500% higher, depending on functionality that has to be adapted. Blind people using websites and blind people driving. The cost is not the same, but the principle is...it's all about the level of accommodation that can be afforded or is appropriate. Believe me when I say that I'm happy when as many people as possible can be accommodated. I just don't get bent out of shape because some people don't care to accommodate others. Rick -Original Message- From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org] On Behalf Of Matt Morgan-May Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 6:50 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Who's responsible (was Re: [WSG] add to favorites?) On 3/25/09 12:12 PM, Rick Faircloth r...@whitestonemedia.com wrote: The correct design (and web standards that are adhered to or not) is that design for which the client is paying. Sorry, but that just reads to me like a way to excuse slipshod work. It is one thing to figure out any old way to collect the check, and quite another to think out all the angles and produce something that reaches the largest possible audience. I think the latter is far more professional, and all of the people I now work with, and all the ones I think of as successful in web design/dev, sweat those details. I've personally refused jobs before based on the knowledge that accessibility was being left out. So I know it can be done. Whether others would do the same is a question of their own judgment, not their professionalism. A standard could be imposed on all concerned that would make driving accessible to the blind...it certainly is technically possible...however, the cost is simply too high to make that a reality. First off, no, it's not possible. The technology doesn't exist today, or we'd all have self-driving cars already. Though what this has to do with pragmatic accessibility for web pages, which is generally a low-cost proposition for most of what's out there, is beyond me. Making content more accessible is not a boil-the-ocean strategy. Most of the basics for web accessibility take little work, and are easy to integrate into the average dev's everyday tasks. The only time it can be really costly is when it's been ignored the whole time the work was being done. Likewise (...in that they are both referenced sequentially in one email...) site owners may be under time and monetary restraints that prohibit making their websites accessible to all. Or they may just choose not to...again, it's the boss's choice, not the designer's. So, let me boil this down: web accessibility is like blind people driving. Wow. I think the only thing they may have in common is your willingness to contemplate them as an implementer. Which is fine, in and of itself. I'm not the boss of you. But if you're trying to equate the task of following a few best practices with reinventing the world's transportation infrastructure, well, good luck with that. - m *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: Who's responsible (was Re: [WSG] add to favorites?)
As I understand this thread, it is not about whether current standards are right or wrong, but how did we end up with these standards in the first place? The current standards did not just spring into existence, fully formed, out of the brow of some greek god. The standards evolved as peoples understanding of the web evolved. And the web itself was evolving at the same time, just as it continues to do. Just as the standards will continue to evolve. I'm certainly not saying that I disagree with current web standards, just that it would be foolish to think that they are *definitive*. As professionals, it is our responsibility to be reflective practitioners: to question the status quo and make sure it's really working. We can't do that without asking questions, or without listening to people who ask questions. The web is still an incredibly young medium and anyone who imagines that the standards we have today will apply to the web of tomorrow (I'm thinking of about a 10 year away tomorrow) would be naive. L. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
RE: Who's responsible (was Re: [WSG] add to favorites?)
Wow...10 years from now...as fast as change occurs these days, who knows what things will be like then! Rick -Original Message- From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org] On Behalf Of nedlud Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 8:58 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: Who's responsible (was Re: [WSG] add to favorites?) As I understand this thread, it is not about whether current standards are right or wrong, but how did we end up with these standards in the first place? The current standards did not just spring into existence, fully formed, out of the brow of some greek god. The standards evolved as peoples understanding of the web evolved. And the web itself was evolving at the same time, just as it continues to do. Just as the standards will continue to evolve. I'm certainly not saying that I disagree with current web standards, just that it would be foolish to think that they are *definitive*. As professionals, it is our responsibility to be reflective practitioners: to question the status quo and make sure it's really working. We can't do that without asking questions, or without listening to people who ask questions. The web is still an incredibly young medium and anyone who imagines that the standards we have today will apply to the web of tomorrow (I'm thinking of about a 10 year away tomorrow) would be naive. L. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: Who's responsible (was Re: [WSG] add to favorites?)
Rick Faircloth wrote: Wow...10 years from now...as fast as change occurs these days, who knows what things will be like then! Blind people flying around with jetpacks ;) P -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com | http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ __ Co-lead, Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: Who's responsible (was Re: [WSG] add to favorites?)
So true. But how long has the WG been working on HTML5? And assuming anyone ever reaches consensus on that, how long until browsers start supporting it in wide enough numbers for it to be a practical alternative for developers? Technology can change fast, but in the world of web, it can take some time for those changes to be felt. The web will be different enough in 2-3 years, but I imagine 10 years from now will be a complete paradigm shift. It was only ~10 years ago when table based layouts were best practice, and today forums like this would cheerfully roast anyone for even suggesting such a thing. (Actually I've seen people get flamed here for suggesting *any* use of a table, including for showing tabular data ;) ) L. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: Who's responsible (was Re: [WSG] add to favorites?)
On Mar 25, 2009, at 6:39 PM, Patrick H. Lauke wrote: Rick Faircloth wrote: Wow...10 years from now...as fast as change occurs these days, who knows what things will be like then! Blind people flying around with jetpacks ;) It will be just like in the Star Trek Voyager, that Tom Paris found a space shuttle which has a neurogenic interface that interacts directly with the driver's thoughts :-) And no, it will not named Alice, it likely will be named Rick. tee *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: Who's responsible (was Re: [WSG] add to favorites?) - ADMIN THREAD CLOSED
ADMIN THREAD CLOSED *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
RE: Who's responsible (was Re: [WSG] add to favorites?)
Cool! They'll have implants and better vision than organically-sighted people! -Original Message- From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org] On Behalf Of Patrick H. Lauke Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 9:40 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: Who's responsible (was Re: [WSG] add to favorites?) Rick Faircloth wrote: Wow...10 years from now...as fast as change occurs these days, who knows what things will be like then! Blind people flying around with jetpacks ;) P -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com | http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ __ Co-lead, Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
