WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Image gallery script


From: Celeste Mackintosh
Date: Jan 27, 2010 3:48PM

Hi Keith,

Thank you for this :)

I think it was the generated source when javascript is on - there's no link to the full-size image, and you lose all the caption information. The actual source is fine, it was just the generated source that I wondered whether there were issues with.


-----Original Message-----
From: <EMAIL REMOVED> [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Keith Parks
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 11:25 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Image gallery script

On Jan 26, 2010, at 8:13 PM, Celeste Mackintosh wrote:

> Hi there,
> Could someone give me an opinion on this script?
> http://www.twospy.com/galleriffic/example-2.html
> I've had a play tabbing through and it seemed okay navigating with the
> keyboard to me, but the html the script generates isn't so useable.
> Would it be okay to provide an alternate version linked to above the
> gallery (and maybe hidden off the page) for screenreaders where
> captions that have links etc. are fully replicated? What do people
> think of this gallery?

I've been using the galleriffic + jquery combination for slide shows for a while now. They seemed to me to be reasonably accessible if one sets them up properly.

The one shortcoming that I recall is that the highlighting that shows up on Hover does not also show up on Focus when tabbing. It may be fixable in the css or js file, but I couldn't figure it out. It also may not be a problem in IE (I do my development on a Mac, and frankly can't recall if I tested that aspect in IE.)

As for the html side, I found that pretty straightforward, even easy:
a <ul> of thumbnail images, with links to the full-size versions. What did you find not so usable about it?

Keith Parks
Graphic Designer/Web Designer
Student Affairs Communications Services
San Diego State University
San Diego, CA 92182-7444
(619) 594-1046


Yes We Can!*

*should not be interpreted to mean that we necessarily will