Thanks for the replies. I don't like spamming and try to build a site that doesn't need it. I can't say I've been innocent, the web still has some of my spammed alt tags from years gone by. Thank you for the information about the JAWS readers, that is what I was looking for. Some good reason, above the obvious ethical reasons, to maintain standards and avoid using css to spam a page.
Ted -----Original Message----- From: Patrick H. Lauke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 11:09 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [WSG] cover me -- I'm gonna be naughty! Ted Drake wrote: > I know it is a bad thing to spam your keywords. But if we need to do it to be > competitive, Sorry if I sound flippant, but if the business' competitiveness can only be maintained by spamming, then I'd say there's a fundamental business problem there. > would this at least protect those that are innocent, the people who need to use screenreaders? You can't, as a rule, say that screenreaders will not read out display:none'd page elements. I have an older version of JAWS at work (4.02), and that quite happily reads out the css-hidden things. So, don't rely on this... -- 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 ****************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ****************************************************** ****************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ******************************************************
