On 2009/07/07 21:05 (GMT+0100) Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis composed:
On 7/7/09 04:19, Felix Miata wrote:
To suppose Frozen means anything other than frozen undersize would
be a difficult supposition to support, as one need only peruse the web
to see how rare frozen at or larger than default
Dennis Lapcewich wrote:
While I agree with your general sentiment, I have to say I find
the assertion that all people aged 35-40 or more are for all
intents and purposes [...] web disabled and [...] in immediate
need of web accessibility questionable, to say the least.
I did not write
On 7/7/09 04:19, Felix Miata wrote:
To suppose Frozen means anything other than frozen undersize would
be a difficult supposition to support, as one need only peruse the web
to see how rare frozen at or larger than default can be found. Thus,
disrespectful (smaller than default) font sizes
2009/7/8 Dennis Lapcewich dlapcew...@fs.fed.us:
Dennis Lapcewich wrote:
While I agree with your general sentiment, I have to say I find
the assertion that all people aged 35-40 or more are for all
intents and purposes [...] web disabled and [...] in immediate
need of web accessibility
Dennis Lapcewich wrote:
While I agree with your general sentiment, I have to say I find
the assertion that all people aged 35-40 or more are for all
intents and purposes [...] web disabled and [...] in immediate
need of web accessibility questionable, to say the least.
I really don't see what
On 2009/07/05 11:21 (GMT+0100) Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis composed:
Felix Miata wrote:
On 2009/07/04 10:13 (GMT+0100) Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis composed:
Felix Miata wrote:
Zoom, minimum text size and magnifiers are defense mechanisms. The
basic problem is the pervasive offense - not
On 4/7/09 16:09, Felix Miata wrote:
On 2009/07/04 10:13 (GMT+0100) Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis composed:
On 2/7/09 17:07, Felix Miata wrote:
Zoom, minimum text size and magnifiers are defense mechanisms. The
basic problem is the pervasive offense - not respecting users'
font size choices by
On 2/7/09 17:07, Felix Miata wrote:
Zoom, minimum text size and magnifiers are defense mechanisms. The basic
problem is the pervasive offense - not respecting users' font size choices by
incorporating them at 100% for the bulk of content. Thus, an even better way
to address presbyopia is to
sine qua non = indispensible
On Thu, July 2, 2009 9:27 pm, Rick Faircloth wrote:
It is the sine qua non of accessibility
And that's exactly the point I'm trying to make...just addressing the
font-size issue
is the most basic form of accomodation possible. We can do better.
On Thu, Jul 2,
sine qua non also means most basic - yes, it is the most critical aspect
of accessibility
to information, if the information is contained in textual form, but it is
only the most
primal level of accessibility to be offered.
New techniques, well not actually new, but finally unleashed legally, are
presume you meant 'moot' not 'mute' ?
Regards,
Mike
From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org on behalf of Rick Faircloth
Sent: Fri 03/07/2009 14:01
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Accessible websites
sine qua non also means most basic - yes
' ?
Regards,
Mike
From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org on behalf of Rick Faircloth
Sent: Fri 03/07/2009 14:01
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Accessible websites
sine qua non also means most basic - yes, it is the most critical aspect
I think this may be the service to which you refer...
http://www.typekit.com
http://blog.typekit.com
--
DonkeyMagic: Website design development
http://www.donkeymagic.co.uk
***
List Guidelines:
Yes, thanks for the reference, Richard.
I believe that's exactly what I was reading about.
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Richard Stephenson
donkeyma...@gmail.comwrote:
I think this may be the service to which you refer...
http://www.typekit.com
http://blog.typekit.com
--
DonkeyMagic:
While I agree with your general sentiment, I have to say I find the
assertion that all people aged 35-40 or more are for all intents and
purposes [...] web disabled and [...] in immediate need of web
accessibility questionable, to say the least.
I'd be careful of overstating the case like
On 2009/07/02 08:46 (GMT-0700) Dennis Lapcewich composed:
The technical term is presbyopia, a physical inability of the lens of the
eye to focus properly. Specifically, the lens loses its elasticity and
ability to properly focus on near objects. It is a natural course of
aging. Onset
But how will you magnify the images and layout as designed for me to view?
Addressing font issues is only the absolute basic attempt to make the web
more accessible...It's important to be able to see how something is said
and with
what supporting content and context, rather than just what is said.
On Thu, 2 Jul 2009, Rick Faircloth wrote:
But how will you magnify the images and layout as designed for me to view?
Addressing font issues is only the absolute basic attempt to make the web
more accessible...It's important to be able to see how something is said
and with
what supporting
It is the sine qua non of accessibility
And that's exactly the point I'm trying to make...just addressing the
font-size issue
is the most basic form of accomodation possible. We can do better.
On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Chris F.A. Johnson c...@freeshell.orgwrote:
On Thu, 2 Jul 2009,
On 2009/07/02 15:20 (GMT-0400) Rick Faircloth composed:
Felix Miata wrote:
Zoom, minimum text size and magnifiers are defense mechanisms. The basic
problem is the pervasive offense - not respecting users' font size
choices by incorporating them at 100% for the bulk of content. Thus, an
I'll just address one you raised Jens.
Google does not currently parse external Javascript files. So unless
Fairfax uses simple inline Javascript, and exposes spiderable URLS,
that's probably good enough for most of us to use progressive
enhancement methodology . Ask Lucas. When he gets
...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org] On
Behalf Of Chris Dimmock
Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2009 3:23 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Accessible websites (was: accessible free web hosting
account)
I'll just address one you raised Jens.
Google does not currently
[mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org] On
Behalf Of Chris Dimmock
Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2009 3:23 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Accessible websites (was: accessible free web hosting
account)
I'll just address one you raised Jens.
Google does not currently parse external Javascript
If you are unsure that web accessibility should play a role, take this
test. In a group of people have everyone stand up. Those who are unable
to stand may remain seated. Now pose these three requests, in order:
1) If you are wear glasses, contacts and/or have had corrective eye
surgery,
Web accessibility is being more properly handled by browser creators using
magnification functionality,
which more effectively provides a better, more satisfying user experience
because images, as well as text,
can be magnified. While previous magnification functionality has required
users to
2009/7/2 Dennis Lapcewich dlapcew...@fs.fed.us:
If you are unsure that web accessibility should play a role, take this test.
In a group of people have everyone stand up. Those who are unable to stand
may remain seated. Now pose these three requests, in order:
1) If you are wear glasses,
Hi all,
I believe making sites accessible is very important.
We are all used to ramps near stairs, lifts near escalators, lowered curbs at
intersections. We need to get used to baking in time into our projects for
accessible elements.
Such elements are hidden headings (to aid semantics), skip
I think it is pretty good.
But one slight irony/anomaly - the 'low vision' link is in pretty
small font. Took me a while to find it... notetoselftime for new
glasses prescription/notetoself
jim
On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Jens-Uwe
Korffjko...@fairfaxdigital.com.au wrote:
Hi all,
I
On 30 Jun 2009, at 16:46, Jens-Uwe Korff wrote:
For an example of a high-contrast version may I suggest to check out
the Sydney Morning Herald's Travel section (http://www.smh.com.au/travel/
). Click on Low vision in the navigation bar (We're going to
replace low vision with high contrast
At 6/29/2009 11:46 PM, Jens-Uwe Korff wrote:
I found that some of these elements take quite some time to
integrate. Creating high-contrast CSS can take up to a day (or more
if you're new to it), non-Javascript states usually more than an
hour because you also have to edit the script.
By
Jens-Uwe Korff wrote:
Hi all,
I believe making sites accessible is very important.
We are all used to ramps near stairs, lifts near escalators, lowered
curbs at intersections. We need to get used to baking in time into
our projects for accessible elements.
[...]
I agree wholeheartedly.
Hi,
thank you for your thoughts and feedback.
After all, the few people that do spend any time at all on making their
websites accessible,
probably aren't going to be experts in accessibility, so probably won't do a
very good job of it.
Yes and no. If we had no pioneers which
32 matches
Mail list logo
