-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Matt Morgan-May Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 3:50 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Who's responsible (was Re: [WSG] add to favorites?)
On 3/25/09 12:12 PM, "Rick Faircloth" <[email protected]> wrote: >> The correct design (and web standards that are adhered to or not) is >> that design for which the client is paying. > Sorry, but that just reads to me like a way to excuse slipshod work. It is one thing to figure out any old way to collect the check, and quite another to think out all the > angles and produce something that reaches the largest possible audience. I think the latter is far more professional, and all of the people I now work with, and all the > ones I think of as successful in web design/dev, sweat those details. You seem to assume that no one took the steps to create other options or inform in these situations. I have. And I've been told "no go, do it my way or the highway". Not everyone is reasonable about things like that. Some people insist they know it all and persist with ridiculous demands that are often non-standards compliant and downright ugly. Regardless of the alternatives they've been handed. I've dealt with some moronic requests when it comes to websites, from people that know nothing about it. I'm sure we all have at some point. > I've personally refused jobs before based on the knowledge that accessibility was being left out. So I know it can be done. Whether others would do the same is a question > of their own judgment, not their professionalism. It's good that you have the luxury to be able to make that call. The reality is that not everyone is in a position, financially or otherwise. Yes, it can be done. It is simply not always practical. That said, I'm in a position where I typically do get to call the shots. I want standards compliance. Every design is blood and sweat because I'm not compromising. But to get where I am, I had to put up with a lot of hideous nonsense along the way. I'm not saying let's just toss standards out the window. I'm just saying that the reality is that sometimes we're stuck with compromise, or worse, we don't even get to compromise. Learning how to balance conflicting requirements, or how to offer alternatives in some cases, strikes me as a valuable tool to advance the cause of usability and accessibility. As with any cause, sometimes advancement and education of the masses involves babysteps and doing what we can. Speaking of doing what we can: anyone taken a good look at whitehouse.gov? While they've made some great strides in modernizing the site, its sorely lacking in basic accessibility. For starters: fixed font sizes. I filled out the comment form to give feedback on the subject. If more of us piped up, it could benefit. Janice ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [email protected] *******************************************************************
