E-mail List Archives
Thread: Javascript and WCAG 2.0
Number of posts in this thread: 6 (In chronological order)
From: Liko, Todd
Date: Tue, Jul 15 2014 7:02AM
Subject: Javascript and WCAG 2.0
No previous message | Next message →
Hello all.
Could I please get some feedback on the use of Javascript and compliance with WCAG 2.0?
I had a meeting with developers about the use of JavaScript . I explained that JavaScript is an accessible technology and can be used if used in an accessible way. In addition, I explained that functionality provided by the use of JavaScript does not have to exist when JavaScript is disabled or not available, as long as the content is still available. There was some argument on this point, particularly about the content being available. I said that if content becomes or remains hidden when JavaScript is disabled or not available that this is considered a failure.
One of the developers said they could optionally post a conformance statement on their application indicating what technologies are required to use the application.
I have read conformance requirements 4 and 5 under Understanding Conformance Requirements<http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/conformance.html>; and the definition for Understanding Accessibility Support<http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/conformance.html#uc-accessibility-support-head>; in WCAG 2.0 and do not see this.
Any thoughts on this?
Thanks in advance.
_______
Todd Liko
Communications Advisor | Conseiller en communications Web Services | Services Web Communications and Marketing | Communications et Marketing
427 Laurier Avenue West (AEAD), Ottawa ON K1A 0N5
427 Avenue Laurier Ouest (AEAD), Ottawa (Ontario) K1A 0N5 e-mail / courriel: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = <mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = <mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = %3cmailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >>
telephone / téléphone: 613-949-9425 | fax / télécopieur: 613-949-2386
blackberry: 613-796-6375
Government of Canada | Gouvernement du Canada
From: Jonathan Avila
Date: Tue, Jul 15 2014 7:16AM
Subject: Re: Javascript and WCAG 2.0
← Previous message | Next message →
> In addition, I explained that functionality provided by the use of
JavaScript does not have to exist when JavaScript is disabled or not
available, as long as the content is still available
Javascript can be relied upon without support for a non-Javascript
alternative if the use of it is accessibility supported and meets the
other conformance requirements of WCAG.
The point that may be confusing is the non-relied up on technologies under
the non-interference conformance requirement. For example, if the site
does not rely upon Javascript then turning off Javascript must still allow
the page to conform.
See understanding conformance requirement #5
(http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/conformance.html)
* when any technology that is not relied upon is turned on in a user
agent,
* when any technology that is not relied upon is turned off in a user
agent, and
* when any technology that is not relied upon is not supported by a user
agent
So for example, unless the site is conformant without Javascript you'd
need to claim use of Javascript as a relied upon technology.
Jonathan
From: Liko, Todd
Date: Wed, Jul 16 2014 5:33AM
Subject: Re: JavaScript and WCAG 2.0
← Previous message | Next message →
Thank you Jonathan.
WCAG 2.0 (if you choose to interpret it that way) is saying that users have a choice, they can either upgrade their web browsers and/or assistive technologies to more current ones that are compliant with various technologies such as JavaScript or choose to continue using tools that do not have the latest and greatest or disable these technologies. The problem with this approach is the assumption that everyone can purchase, download and even install current tools.
It seems to that this creates barriers to accessing the information for some users, which is counter to what WCAG 2.0 is trying to accomplish, removing barriers.
Todd.
From: Andrew Kirkpatrick
Date: Wed, Jul 16 2014 6:49AM
Subject: Re: JavaScript and WCAG 2.0
← Previous message | Next message →
Todd,
I believe that Jon has correctly described the situation related to WCAG 2.0 and JavaScript.
Of course, you are also correct in that there are some users that may have problems if a site relies on JavaScript (or ARIA, or HTML5, or PDF, or SVG, or...). The goal of WCAG 2.0 conformance cannot be to guarantee that all users have complete access to content, but instead it is to dramatically increase the likelihood that users will have an accessible experience. There will always be some users that will experience barriers with some types of content and there will always be more that could be done to ensure that more users can access the content.
This is a key challenge for a standard like WCAG 2.0 - balancing the possible benefits to users with the impact on authors. We could make a standard that is more aggressive in addressing a larger set of user needs, but then there is the risk that the standard would be regarded as too difficult to implement and may not be adopted into policies. We also see this with the WCAG 2.0 levels (A, AA, AAA), where policies adopting WCAG are generally referencing A or AA.
If you see issues that you feel need to be addressed, I encourage you to submit comments or questions via the WCAG 2.0 public comment form (http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/comments/onlineform) - the group is always willing to get feedback on current text and areas for improvement.
Thanks,
AWK
From: Liko, Todd
Date: Wed, Jul 16 2014 7:30AM
Subject: Re: JavaScript and WCAG 2.0
← Previous message | Next message →
Thank you Andrew.
I guess I lean more to the aggressive side. I do understand what you are saying and it does make sense to me when interpreting WCAG 2.0 in that way. I also understand that there will always be barriers for some users, but I do not think we should be creating those barriers. I am not comfortable with telling a user that because they are using a browser or assistive technology that does not support JavaScript, for example, that they cannot obtain the information.
I use the example of someone using a public computer at a public library and the computer has JavaScript disabled or outdated browsers and/or assistive technologies. The user may not be able to access the information. That being said, I also realize this kind of situation is out of our control, so as you said, it is the challenge of balancing the benefits to users vs. the difficulty in implementing and adopting into policies.
I realize this may be a black and white approach and this topic has no doubt been beaten to death already, but I appreciate the feedback.
Thanks,
Todd.
From: Patrick H. Lauke
Date: Wed, Jul 16 2014 7:41AM
Subject: Re: JavaScript and WCAG 2.0
← Previous message | No next message
On 16/07/2014 14:30, Liko, Todd wrote:
> I guess I lean more to the aggressive side. I do understand what you are saying and it does make sense to me when interpreting WCAG 2.0 in that way. I also understand that there will always be barriers for some users, but I do not think we should be creating those barriers. I am not comfortable with telling a user that because they are using a browser or assistive technology that does not support JavaScript, for example, that they cannot obtain the information.
Then of course you're free to make your website/app work perfectly fine
without JavaScript. Realistically, though, a large number of sites that
are more complex than simple static pieces of information of workflows
that can be broken into a few simple server-side forms will struggle to
meet (or simply ignore) guidelines that require a no-scripting version
to be present (see for instance WCAG 1.0).
> I use the example of someone using a public computer at a public library and the computer has JavaScript disabled or outdated browsers and/or assistive technologies. The user may not be able to access the information.
Arguably, that's then a failing of the public library to have an
adequate provision for users with disabilities. And the way the majority
of mainstream websites are built nowadays, having browsers with JS
turned off will make these computers practically unusable for even the
most basic and common sites (social media, news, etc).
IMHO, of course :)
P
--
Patrick H. Lauke
www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke