WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Javascript turned off a violation or user preference?

for

From: chaals@yandex-team.ru
Date: Apr 21, 2015 6:46PM

- Judith.A.Blankman@

22.04.2015, 00:09, " <EMAIL REMOVED> " < <EMAIL REMOVED> >:
> The latest WebAIM survey indicates that 97.6% of respondents have javascript enabled. We are wondering about the remaining 2.4%.
>
> If a person has javascript turned off and cannot perform the primary function of a site, like pay for and download a music file, or book a vacation, is this considered a user preference or a defect?

I think this would actually depend on the nature of a function. If it is something that can be readily achieved without the use of javascript, and there is a design choice to require the javascript path for some reason not related to essential functionality, I would consider it a site defect. For example, paying for and downloading things, streaming video, processing personal information, are examples where I don't see a need for javascript.

But if the site does something that by its nature requires javascript to be effective, for example a collaborative editing package, then I would consider it reasonable to require javascript on the part of the user.

My impression is that this is about the "middle of the road" consensus, although people will dissent in both directions. I am perhaps less accepting of simply insisting on javascript than a hypothetical average…

There is a clear increase in the number of people willing to say it is a user problem if they choose to disable javascript. In my opinion there are still legitimate but not very common reasons for people doing so, making it a question that doesn't have a general yes/no answer

cheers

Chaals

> On the WebAIM site (http://webaim.org/techniques/javascript/) under the heading "JavaScript Reliance" 2nd paragraph it says:
>
> "Accessibility guidelines also require scripted interfaces to be accessible. While WCAG 1.0 from 1999 required that pages be functional and accessible with scripting disabled, WCAG 2.0 and all other modern guidelines allow you to require JavaScript, but the scripted content or interactions must be compliant with the guidelines."
>
> So do I interpret this to mean that when the site states that javascript is required, and javascript is turned off, that this is considered a user preference and not a defect on the site provided it's communicated clearly to that person? Is the Accessibility community in agreement about this?
>
> We want to do the right thing, just don't want to introduce issues unknowingly. The developer understands the need for <noscript> alternatives for scripting, as described on http://webaim.org/techniques/javascript/alternatives.
>
> It's a matter of timing and understanding if the lack of <noscript> alternatives at launch would be considered a barrier, an obstacle, or an annoyance.


--
Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
<EMAIL REMOVED> - - - Find more at http://yandex.com