E-mail List Archives

Re: Accessible popup menus


From: Al Sparber
Date: Jul 29, 2005 12:24AM

From: "Terrence Wood" < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
To: "WebAIM Discussion List" < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 2:17 AM
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Accessible popup menus

> On 29 Jul 2005, at 4:11 PM, Al Sparber wrote:
>> There are no artifacts in any of our test browsers. If you are
>> seeing artifacts, it is a browser bug. I see no artifacts in:
>> Firefox (Windows and Mac)
>> Opera (Windows and Mac)
>> IE (Windows and Mac)
>> Safari
> I have personally tested your product with Firefox, Safari and IE on
> a Mac -- it works fine with a mouse and going tabbing forward
> through the menu, the problem occurs when tabbing backwards through
> the menu using a keyboard.

No artifacts tabbing backwards either.

>>> A menu system cannot be described as WAI priority three compliant
>>> until after it is implemented because at least one of the criteria
>>> is concerned with the link text
>> This is a test case with null links.
> It doesn't matter what case it is, null links still fail on the same
> criteria. The point is this: it cannot be accessible until it is
> applied in a real world situation because you do not control the
> link text. Why not just make the claim that the code validates?

It does validate and it does meet accessibility standards without
error. Whose real world are talking about :-)

>>> On a side note I personally found Ron's page quite usable with a
>>> keyboard.
>> I found it terribly confusing. I understand that people who are
>> regulars on this list have a certain predisposition. That is
>> understandable. But these are purely subjective issues.
> Each to their own, but how about keeping your generalisations to
> yourself, you sound like a bigot?

Do you want to expound on that piece of slander? Sounds like a
left-wing radical kind of fallback to me.

>> I can look at Thatcher's page and see accessibility "features" that
>> are only accessible with JavaScript running.
> What is your point? You can't use javascript and accessibility in
> the same sentence? Or that a web page should be exactly the same in
> any browser?

No, I find accessibility issues on that page. My own interpretive and
subjective issues, which is what the pseudo-science of accessibility
really boils down to.

>> My goal is not to get a seal of approval from an accessibility
>> "guru". My goal is to defend my product, and also to have some
>> enjoyable debates. Perhaps no one has pressed these kinds of issues
>> before :-)
> Pressed what issues? The most you've really managed so far is to
> throw around a few insults, deny your product doesn't work
> effectively for people using keyboards, and demonstrate you have no
> interest or understanding of accessibility issues.

I understand. I'm just not an over-the-top zealot about it :-)

> I find it really interesting that you feel compelled to defend you
> product in a forum where I imagine most of the members don't use

I'm not looking for customers. Thatcher's allegation was posted on my
public newsgroup and I think he's bloody wrong.

Al Sparber

"Designing with CSS is sometimes like barreling down a crumbling
mountain road at 90 miles per hour secure in the knowledge that
repairs are scheduled for next Tuesday".