'Users with Disabilities' is better than 'disabled users' generally,
however, when referring to deaf users, it depends on whether the user is
culturally deaf or not.
Culturally Deaf users are those that use sign language for communication and
belong to the deaf community. They're referred to
Hi Leslie,
Thanks for that, it's interesting to hear from the states about this and I
was hoping that there were some Deaf members on the list :) It would be
great to hear from anyone here in Australia on this point too.
Just to clarify my point, I was using 'big D' Deaf for culturally Deaf and
John Allsopp wrote:
...Has anyone done any user testing on drop downs? Tania
maybe?
In
response
now John has dobbed me in ;-)
USER PREFERENCES
My favourite quote from a usability test session 2 weeks ago
"Drop
down lists obstruct what I want to do [re:
Navigation links] Like
I know employment opportunities are not supposed to be posed
here but Im getting kinda desperate, so my apologies to the
group.
If you are in the Melbourne
area and have experience in web standards development, CSS XHTML as well
as some project management skills, then please send me a
On 4 Aug 2005, at 7:39 PM, Tania Lang wrote:
1) with regular repeat users that want to access deep content quickly
and know where it is e.g. Portals, Intranets, Extranets.
Thanks for the post Tania, very informative and I share many of your
views, I'm especially in favour of the indexes
Herrod, Lisa wrote:
Hi Leslie,
Thanks for that, it's interesting to hear from the states about this and I
was hoping that there were some Deaf members on the list :) It would be
great to hear from anyone here in Australia on this point too.
I'm Australian and I'm hearing impaired, I'm also
Hi all,
Thanks for all the comments on the new ABC home page. I did the front-end
coding, so I'm responsible for *some* of the issues raised.
The resizing thing:
I would have also preferred a scalable layout or a stylesheet switch, but the
design differences are sufficiently great that I had
On 4 Aug 2005, at 9:56 PM, Frederic Fery wrote:
the reference is from 2003, is it likely that people behaviour would
have changed since? (ie people more used to fly out?)
No. Generally speaking usability is a pretty stable field, it's only
the coding techniques that change.
kind regards
Terrence Wood wrote:
Surely, aren't browser bookmarks the mechanism to provide regular
users access to deep content, rather than burden occasional users
with a sitemap on every page?
Interesting. I rarely bookmark an internal page. Often there are many
internal pages of a large site (and
That's not quite true ;)
As people become more accustomed to websites and web application conventions,
their experience with these increases. Intuitiveness is dependent on
experience, so
the ease of use/intuitiveness also changes. I wouldn't say that something from
2003 is
out of date, but
Nicola Rae wrote:
Hi,
Just to chip in, I am writing a couple of articles for GAWDS (guild of
Accessible Web Designers) and have it on authority from them that the
correct terms to use are:
In the UK - instead of 'users with disabilities' - it should be
'disabled users'.
In the UK -
Terrence Wood wrote:
Surely, aren't browser bookmarks
the mechanism to provide regular users access to deep content, rather
than burden occasional users with a sitemap on every page? (Or better
yet make a sitemap page :)
Tania - not quite sure I
understand what you mean by sitemap on
On 4 Aug 2005, at 11:01 PM, Donna Maurer wrote:
That's not quite true ;)
I did say generally speaking ;-)
As people become more accustomed to websites and web application
conventions,
their experience with these increases. Intuitiveness is dependent on
experience, so
the ease of
On 5 Aug 2005, at 12:16 AM, Tania Lang wrote:
Terrence Wood wrote:
Surely, aren't browser bookmarks the mechanism to access to deep
content, rather than burden occasional users with a sitemap on every
page?
Tania - not quite sure I understand what you mean by sitemap on every
page.
I meant
Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
However, once a form control is labelled (implicitly or explicitly)
does UAAG guideline 7 apply? Following OS conventions?
Sure, why wouldn't it?
That was my understanding as well, just wanted confirmation...reading
UAAG (which I'm admittedly unfamiliar
Vicki,
Well said, sane and funny.
Thank you.
Nigel
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Vicki Berry
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 4:57 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: RE: 'users with disabilities' WAS: [WSG] New front page for
As usual it all depends who you ask. In the UK the social model of disabilities
means that 'disabled people' is preferred over 'people with disabilities' since
disabled people implies barriers put in place by society, such as an
inaccessible web site. People with disabilities reads/sounds more
Hi John,
Thanks for the resources - really interesting (and I don't think you're
being contrary).
Nikki
Maxima Consult -- Web Access, Web Sales, Web Profit
Providers of internet marketing services and accessible ebusiness solutions.
Nicola Rae
Maxima Consult
www.webaccessforeveryone.co.uk
All in how each person views it, I suppose. My (not) hearing *is* normal...
For me, the humiliation lies in the obvious misperceptions of people I
meet every day - it's amazing what people will assume you can't do,
simply because you don't have or use a particular physical feature.
To bring
I have an IE question
In Firefox, I can choose an alternate page style quite easily. Is there an
easy way for them to do the same thing in IE?
I found the option to adjust all pages with a user-created style but I
didn't see an option for choosing an alternate style being offered by that
web
On 04/08/05, Drake, Ted C. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have an IE question
In Firefox, I can choose an alternate page style quite easily. Is there an
easy way for them to do the same thing in IE?
Not without using JavaScript.
(It is also easy to choose an alternate page using Opera -- even
Leslie Riggs wrote:
Following web standards is all well and good,
but how are you going to stream the audio when
you can't hear it, if you can't do it this?
How do you know your method will WORK?
Some people can be thick -- even when well-intentioned.
But on the subject of streaming
Hello,
thanks for the information about using a definition list to layout
thumbnail images and text. I think this is a great way to do things. I
am still having some layout issues looking at firefox on the PC
though.
take a look at http://www.wealthdevelopmentmortgage.com/test/test_file_home.htm
Hi Bruce
I'm working on a bug right now so I don't have much time
For more control over the dt positioning, apply position:relative to the dl
and then use absolute positioning for the dt. Or use negative margins to
move it without the positioning.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
Conyers, Dwayne wrote:
Leslie Riggs wrote:
Following web standards is all well and good,
but how are you going to stream the audio when
you can't hear it, if you can't do it this?
How do you know your method will WORK?
Some people can be thick -- even when well-intentioned.
But on the
It's an uphill battle. Accessibility is a hot topic these days, but
online streamed video and audio access by way of captioning or
subtitling for the Deaf / hard of hearing is very poorly implemented.
Even the big sites crowing about how their websites meet and even exceed
accessibility
I recently ran across an issue (I would call it a bug?) in firefox's DOM.
I wrote a rather lengthy bit on it here:
http://www.agavegroup.com/?p=32
But in short, firefox considers whitespace (tab, space, new line) to
be nodes in the DOM. I've browsed the W3C spec, as well as the
Mozilla DOM spec
or a prefs page ala Stop Design. http://www.stopdesign.com
kind regards
Terrence Wood.
On 5 Aug 2005, at 5:03 AM, T. R. Valentine wrote:
In Firefox, I can choose an alternate page style quite easily. Is
there an
easy way for them to do the same thing in IE?
Not without using JavaScript.
On 8/4/05, Patrick Ryan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I recently ran across an issue (I would call it a bug?) in firefox's DOM.
...
But it seems to me white space should be entirely ignored in the DOM.
... Is this a recent Firefox bug or proper behavior
(that must be scripted around...).
I'd be
On Aug 4, 2005, at 1:39 PM, Patrick Ryan wrote:
I recently ran across an issue (I would call it a bug?) in
firefox's DOM.
...
But in short, firefox considers whitespace (tab, space, new line) to
be nodes in the DOM.
...
But it seems to me white space should be entirely ignored in the DOM.
Hi Bruce,
It's looking good but quite different between FF and IE...
Try putting a negative top margin on the image with the hand and key... that
should fix that problem for Firefox. But you might need to make it
conditional so that IE 6 won't do it too. From a design point of view
perhaps a
Thank you for the excellent reponses. I can't believed I missed the
whitespace document
(http://www.mozilla.org/docs/dom/technote/whitespace/)
I see the point, and from a one standard fits all perspective, it
makes good sense.
I do have to wonder though: The point of defining a DOM is to give
On 8/4/05, Rachel Radford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Bruce,
It's looking good but quite different between FF and IE...
Try putting a negative top margin on the image with the hand and key... that
should fix that problem for Firefox. But you might need to make it
conditional so that IE 6
Hi
Currently the W3C WCAG Working Group have been working on
mapping the WCAG 1.0 to WCAG 2.0. I have been assigned an action item to
investigate the mapping of the WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 7.5: Until user agents
provide the ability to stop auto-redirect, do not use markup to redirect pages
or a prefs page ala Stop Design. http://www.stopdesign.com
I'm using server-side scripts to switch Styles Sheets and keep user's
preferences active:
http://www.css-p.com/TNT/
Thierry | www.TJKDesign.com
**
The discussion list for
There are many ways of making a css rule so that different browsers see it
differently (do a google search for css filters...) but the way I do it
would be like this:
div#maincontent_image{/*used as a holder and placement for main images which
appear on a page*/
float:left;
width:214px;
You have a usability/accessibility issue with the onChange event on the
style switcher. Take it out and add a button to submit it. Try NOT using
your mouse and tab through to that form instead, then try and arrow down and
you'll see the issue.
Even something like
Peter Firminger wrote:
You have a usability/accessibility issue with the onChange event on
the style switcher. Take it out and add a button to submit it. Try
NOT using your mouse and tab through to that form instead, then try
and arrow down and you'll see the issue.
I know about it, but
Geoff,
One problem that I've found in both Firefox Safari is that when I increase
the font size the search box and its button disappear from the page.
Hope Stewart
On 4/8/05 7:18 PM, Geoff Pack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
Thanks for all the comments on the new ABC home page. I did
Comments from Rob Sharp [thanks Rob]
Cheers,
Gian
-Original Message-
From: Rob Sharp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, 5 August 2005 10:55 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [WSG] Auto-redirect and its place in WCAG 2.0
Hi,
I'd post this to the list, but it doesn't like my
I'll fix this soon.
thanks,
Geoff.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Hope Stewart
Sent: Friday, 5 August 2005 11:10 AM
To: Web Standards Group
Subject: Re: [WSG] New front page for http://abc.net.au/
Geoff,
One problem that I've
41 matches
Mail list logo
