E-mail List Archives
Is noscript really needed to comply with 508>
From: Donald Evans
Date: Jul 22, 2011 7:48AM
- Next message: Ney André de Mello Zunino : "Re: Concurrent use of aria-describedby and aria-activedescendant"
- Previous message: Bevi Chagnon | PubCom: "Re: PDF Accessibility"
- Next message in Thread: Andrew Kirkpatrick: "Re: Is noscript really needed to comply with 508>"
- Previous message in Thread: None
- View all messages in this Thread
I have a customer who's site is heavily dependent on JavaScript and must
meet Section 508. Section 508 1194.22 Para-L is usually interpreted to
require a noscript option for each script that produces functional text.
This will most likely require the customer to create a separate text only
version.
Do you think a separate site is necessary? I don't believe WCAG 2 requires
a noscript. Only that the functional text be readable by assistive
technology. In this case the site is readable by AT. I wonder what a VPAT
would look like for Para-L if no-script is not implemented.
--
Donald F. Evans,
Making Websites Accessible
Senior Accessibility Architect
Deque Systems
Email: <EMAIL REMOVED>
Download FireEyes Free: http://www.deque.com/products/worldspace-fireeyes
<http://www.deque.com>
- Next message: Ney André de Mello Zunino : "Re: Concurrent use of aria-describedby and aria-activedescendant"
- Previous message: Bevi Chagnon | PubCom: "Re: PDF Accessibility"
- Next message in Thread: Andrew Kirkpatrick: "Re: Is noscript really needed to comply with 508>"
- Previous message in Thread: None
- View all messages in this Thread