WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: css off

for

From: Jukka K. Korpela
Date: Sep 4, 2009 2:20PM

Despain, Dallas wrote:

> I guess I just thought that if TEITAC says "Style sheets are
> well-supported. What is needed instead is a provision on reading
> order" (http://www.access-board.gov/sec508/refresh/report/#81)
> Then that's the argument for it.

It's a poor argument, based only some organization's claim, which in turn is
false - style sheet support has been poor for a very long time, and still
isn't really good.

More importantly, it misses all the points made so often about the idea that
style sheets were meant to be, and are in reality, just optional
presentational suggestions. It's part of the very idea that they can be
switched off or overridden.

> Technologies change, and if AT
> supports style sheets well, why not use them as part of a well
> thought-out, Perceivable, Operable, Understandable, and Robust
> accessible offering designed for real people who want access to
> information on the web?
>
> I'm not sure why my interest in accessibility is being questioned.

My question "Are you really interested in accessibility, or in complying
with some 'accessibility rules' (as interpreted rather arbitrarily)?" was
based on your references to accessibility rules and purported authorities,
instead of discussing the real impact of various approaches.

So, for example, if someone says that he can only view web pages with a
special style sheet designed for him, overriding most if not all of author
style sheets, are you going to throw the argument "style sheets are
well-supported" at him?

--
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/