WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Section 508 Question and Scripting languages

for

From: Joshue O Connor
Date: Jan 9, 2006 4:20PM

> Coupled with this is the phenomenal growth of Web 2.0 elements like RSS
> Feeds which show us that the content, and the ability to manage and control
> it is more important to the user than the presentation.

As John indicates the days of the Browser could be numbered or at least, its
monopoly as the preferred method for users to access content. We already have
such a diverse range of PDA's, and other mobile devices that the ability to effectively
manage this content (going forward) hangs on that content being "structured".

Perhaps as the alternative user agents flourish these scripts will be
expanded to cover additional agents. However, we need to recognize that the
"web of the future" may be engaged on the side of a toaster or microwave
oven or on devices that haven't been invented yet.

Yes indeed. In fact what you say rightly suggests that in order to avoid a technological "Tower of Babel" they must!!

I suppose the thrust of my post is that I am curious about the place that scripting languages have
in the "Brave New Now".

Josh

John E. Brandt wrote:
>
> <<<clip>>>Should you use JS or other non-supported scripting languages for
> core functionality at all?.
>
>
>>JS has a "do-not-touch " status in the world of accessibility that I think
>
> is unwarranted.
>
>
>>This may change in the future when support for scripting languages improves
>
> (if). JS is a potent and powerful client side scripting language and has
> much promise for powerful Web based applications via the DOM. <<clip>>
>
> Joshue makes an interesting point and one that I am struggling with
> regarding a client who recently has asks me to review their site which uses
> a significant amount of Flash objects for the navigation. I also routinely
> review sites with large amounts of JavaScript and then have to engage in the
> same type of questioning the other writers comment on; "is this functional?"
>
>
> My general philosophy in web design is that of "universal design" and I
> generally adhere to a prescription to keep content and presentation
> separate. In addition to the accessibility issues, it is fairly clear that
> the movement to alternative user agents dictates the need to separate the
> two. Coupled with this is the phenomenal growth of Web 2.0 elements like RSS
> Feeds which show us that the content, and the ability to manage and control
> it is more important to the user than the presentation.
>
> BTW, I would revise Joshue's last sentence above to read, "...has much
> promise for powerful BROWSER based applications via the DOM." I have to
> wonder if the days of browsers might not be numbered.
>
> Perhaps as the alternative user agents flourish these scripts will be
> expanded to cover additional agents. However, we need to recognize that the
> "web of the future" may be engaged on the side of a toaster or microwave
> oven or on devices that haven't been invented yet.
>
> Devotees talk about JavaScripting providing functionality to web sites but
> generally these are only for those users who are not blind or visually
> impaired. And they only, for the moment work on traditional web browsers.
>
> So, for now, I vote to use scripts sparingly and continue to evaluate on a
> case-by-case basis. And, I look forward to what others have to say on this
> matter.
>
>
> John E. Brandt
> Augusta, ME USA
> www.jebswebs.com
> <EMAIL REMOVED>
>
>