--On Thursday, August 3, 2006 7:14 PM -0400 emf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Thanks so much for the docking-boxes hookup.
>
> ~ethan
fyi...some drag and drop usability articles:
Drag and Drop Controls
By Free Usability Advice.
"Question: Are there any usability issues with using drag and drop
c
--On Thursday, August 3, 2006 7:14 PM -0400 emf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You're a goddess, laura. Thanks so much for the docking-boxes hookup.
>
> ~ethan
You're most welcome, Ethan.
It may have some potential to aid usability in some circumstances.
Just be careful to heed the warnings and r
On Jul 7, 2006, at 12:08 AM, Brad Knowles wrote:
>> I'm much more
>> bugged by the Flash-only sites that are an avoidable annoyance for
>> me, but I can imagine are a scream-out-loud frustration for screen
>> reader based users.
On August 2, 2006, at 12:08 AM, David Andrews wrote:
> As a screen
> Ethan wrote:
>> Can you do me a favor and let me know how these examples work
>> for you?
>>
>> http://tool-man.org/examples/sorting.html
Laura wrote:
> Works great for able bodied mouse users.
>
> But how are people with mobility impairments like low dexterity
> (unable to use a pointing devi
fyi...WebAIM's handy Section 508 checklist has been updated. A portion
of it is about scripts:
http://www.webaim.org/standards/508/checklist.php#two
btw...I want to invite anyone interested in receiving weekly news and
information about web design and development to join the webdev
listserv and
Ethan wrote:
> Can you do me a favor and let me know how these examples work
> for you?
>
> http://tool-man.org/examples/sorting.html
Works great for able bodied mouse users.
But how are people with mobility impairments like low dexterity (unable
to use a pointing device like a mouse and instea
Bryan wrote:
> I've seen WAY to much bad scripting (and I'm not implying that the
> code you are going to write is going to be bad) to actually want to
> implement and Javascript.
I've seen a lot of bad, inaccessible scripting too.
But if JavaScript is used in a device independent way to *progre
Ethan wrote:
>> No in-page form validation?
Brad wrote:
> I'd rather not, no. I have yet to see a single place on the Internet
> that actually does it right, and across all platform/browser
> combinations.
When using Javascript for form validation, there is a right way and a
wrong way.
The ri
Ethan wrote:
>>> One example is keeping extraneous text hidden until it is
>>> selected; I imagine that someone using a screen reader/portable
>>> device would appreciate being able to read a "overview" page
>>> variant and then being able to expand as necessary.
An overview at the top of a page
At 01:54 PM 7/5/2006, John W. Baxter wrote:
>> Does the industry (I almost wrote "do we") know how big a problem
>> this is in practice? That is, what fraction of users of screen
>> readers and other assistive stuff routinely run with JavaScript
>> active?
>>
>> Since the assertion here is "scree
--On Thursday, July 06, 2006 1:30 AM +0200 emf wrote:
> I had indicated in a
> previous post that the mailman interface I am building
> will be fully
> functional without javascript/css;
Excellent, Ethan. Sorry for the confusion.
Thanks for all of your hard work.
All the Best,
Laura
_
--On Thursday, July 06, 2006 1:30 AM +0200 emf wrote:
> I had indicated in a
> previous post that the mailman interface I am building
> will be fully
> functional without javascript/css;
Excellent, Ethan. Sorry for the confusion.
Thanks for all of your hard work.
All the Best,
Laura
_
--On Wednesday, July 5, 2006 8:54 PM +0200 emf wrote:
> Are you suggesting I provide *no* link for the
> screen-reader-with-javascript client and let them at some point
> figure out that they're not seeing what's going on and thus turn off
> javascript?
>
> That seems like a worse solution.
I'm
--On Tuesday, July 4, 2006 9:44 PM +0200 emf wrote:
> I am determined to provide some JavaScript in the 'standard'
> interface, as it will make for enhanced ease-of-use for those sighted
> people using a modern browser.
Hi Ethan,
It says in 6.3 of WCAG 1.0 to "Ensure that pages are usable when
--On Friday, June 30, 2006 12:00 PM +0200 emf wrote:
> I'm thinking of using Kid to generate pseudo-random numbers for ids.
> This works great, except when someone wants to use an id selector in
> CSS or getElementById() in JavaScript.
> If I do this, I'll have to use class attributes (which hap
--On Thursday, June 29, 2006 8:09 PM +0200 emf wrote:
>> One of the tools that I have my students use is to test forms is the
>> WAVE. [5] It will spot violations like missing labels, labels not
>> associated with inputs, empty labels, etc. and notify you with
>> icons. [6]
>
> Great! I will use
--On Thursday, June 22, 2006 4:15 AM +0200 emf wrote:
> If you know of a way that I can
> actually test JAWS or another screen reader, I would be grateful for
> the pointer.
David Andrews already mentioned the demo versions of JAWS and
Window-Eyes [1]. Thank you Dave for offering to help test!
--On Thursday, June 22, 2006 4:15 AM +0200 emf wrote:
> Thanks very much for your feedback, Laura! I am something of a
> standards fanatic; all the pages I've re-written so far have made
> heavy use of label (although I use the implicit label where
> possible), fieldset, legend, thead & tbody a
On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 09:01:12PM -0400, emf wrote:
> I'm especially interested in getting any feedback, either on the wiki
> or here, about any and all WebUI - or UI in general - ideas in
> people's heads.
Hi Ethan,
I mentioned this about a year ago [1], it would be great if the Mailman
tem
3] to W3C standards would aid accessibility.
If we can be of help in this effort please let us know.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Laura Carlson and the ITSS University of Minnesota Duluth Web Team
http://www.d.umn.edu/itss/about/teams.html#www
[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCO
20 matches
Mail list logo
