On 10 Aug 2008, at 04:57, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It would be really nice, that instead of introducing more and more
design element features like ARIA markup, that what is and isn't
supported at different levels (HTML4 or HTML5 or XHTML),
ARIA is about accessibility, not design.
that w3c and the browser vendor's worked together to properly come
to agreement on what should be used rather then what they want to
make as they're own spin off.
We are. WHAt-WG was a co-operation between three major browser
vendors, and the work they produced in Web Applications 1.0 has been
rolled into the W3C as HTML5. Apple have made a number of vendor
specific extensions to CSS recently, but they've submitted them to the
CSS WG for consideration for CSS3.
I mean, look at what IE does to CSS, and then Opera uses the
standards differently although much better. At least, as far as I
can tell Mozilla are the only ones to get it completely right, but
then even it has it's own quirks.
:confused: You have an example? How do Opera treat standards worse
than Mozilla? Opera probably has the least vendor specific CSS
features of any major browser, and is at least on feature par with
Safari and Mozilla. As far as I know Opera are the closest to full
CSS2.1 support (only visibility: collapse missing in 9.5), and up
there with CSS3 with full selectors support and many other features.
The next version of our Core engine supports all of ACID3 for example
(including web fonts, HSLA/RGBA etc.).
No, instead of developing new ways to write markup, they need to get
into agreement (finally) of what the standards are truly going to be.
I for one am tired of writing up code for different browser's and
having to hack code around to make things work.
What we need to be doing is pushing the vendor's into getting it
right.
James Jeffery wrote:
Never really heard of ARIA until I came across it in a Web
Development magazine (.net mag). I have just spent a few hours
getting my head around it, and whilst I agree it looks useful for
screen readers and such, isn't it less semantic?
Applying attributes that would currently make your markup invalid
is something which I am not happy about. Along with that, using
<span> to create a checkbox seems less semantic than using form
elements.
Is ARIA markup only supposed to be used with browsers who have JS
enabled or sites that use alot of JS for dynamic content? What
about browsers that don't support ARIA markup?
I'm only dipping my feet in the water at the moment so I probably
don't fully understand, but from what I have read so far it seems a
bit wishy washy at the moment.
Any replies appreciated.
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
David Storey
Chief Web Opener,
Product Manager Opera Dragonfly,
Consumer Product Manager Opera Core,
Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group member
Consumer Product Management & Developer Relations
Opera Software ASA
Oslo, Norway
Mobile: +47 94 22 02 32
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Blog: http://my.opera.com/dstorey
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
