E-mail List Archives
Re: Build for the bugs?
From: Bryan Garaventa
Date: Feb 20, 2015 4:26PM
- Next message: Greg Gamble: "Re: It's Official - New Sec. 508 is out"
- Previous message: Ryan E. Benson: "Re: It's Official - New Sec. 508 is out"
- Next message in Thread: Léonie Watson: "Re: Build for the bugs?"
- Previous message in Thread: John Foliot: "Re: Build for the bugs?"
- View all messages in this Thread
I always recommend adhering to the spec, because as support increases, your widget will only work better as time goes on, whereas if
you try hacking a solution for a particular browser/AT combination, it will likely only break as proper support is refined.
-----Original Message-----
From: <EMAIL REMOVED> [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Asa Baylus
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2015 2:20 PM
To: <EMAIL REMOVED>
Subject: [WebAIM] Build for the bugs?
I recently joined this list and have noticed a number of discussions surrounding bugs in AT and how to code solutions around these
bugs.
It reminds me of the browser wars.
My question is... Should we be coding for the browser / AT or for the spec?
- Asa
Sent from my iPhone
- Next message: Greg Gamble: "Re: It's Official - New Sec. 508 is out"
- Previous message: Ryan E. Benson: "Re: It's Official - New Sec. 508 is out"
- Next message in Thread: Léonie Watson: "Re: Build for the bugs?"
- Previous message in Thread: John Foliot: "Re: Build for the bugs?"
- View all messages in this Thread