E-mail List Archives

Search E-mail List Archives for

Number of posts in this thread: 3 (In chronological order)

From: Karl Groves
Date: Thu, Sep 04 2003 2:16PM
Subject: RE: Section 508 Standards Compliance and Scripts
No previous message | Next message →

Forgive me if I am off base. I am coming into this conversation late.
IMO, a site is a complete accessibility failure if the content is not usable for persons with JavaScript off/ with browsers that do not recognize JavaScript.

There should be no reason for important content to be reliant on client-side scripting.
Think of it in these terms: is the content understandable to the same or reasonable level regardless of technology used to access it? If yes, then it is accessible. If no, then it is not.

One should not think of accessibility in terms of "Am I satisfying _______ guideline?", but rather "Can all people use this?"

Karl L. Groves, Certified Master CIW Designer
E-Commerce Manager
NASA Federal Credit Union
500 Prince Georges Blvd.
Upper Marlboro, MD 20774

301-249-1800 ext.497
Fax: 301-390-4531

Opinions expressed in this e-mail represent only myself and are not in any way to be taken as the words or opinions of my employer.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
> Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 3:15 PM
> To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> Subject: RE: Section 508 Standards Compliance and Scripts
>
>
> Section 508 is based on WAI but scattered a bit in terms of
> Priority levels.
> With regard to the JavaScript question, I believe that WAI is
> a bit more
> strict and would be more likely to reject some claims of compliance as
> compared with Section 508. If you can achieve compliance with
> WAI Priority
> 2, you will be in good standing for Section 508.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
> > Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 2:16 PM
> > To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > Subject: RE: Section 508 Standards Compliance and Scripts
> >
> >
> > [from my previous post under this subject]
> > "KYVU currently uses a CMS that makes a similar claim about
> > its product
> > ("content written to the screen before the page loads"). Disabling
> > JavaScript while using that platform makes course material
> > inaccessible.
> > All an end user receives is a one sentence message stating
> > that the page
> > won't work w/ JavaScript disabled, and no other means to
> > access the course
> > is provided. How can this be considered compliance...???"
> >
> > Thanks to all for the very useful feedback to date.
> >
> > But...how about this question, but in regards to WCAG 1.0,
> > priority 1. This
> > is the standard to which the Commonwealth of Kentucky is
> > probably going to
> > hold their sites accountable. Would a course management
> > system that did not
> > display course material when JavaScript was disabled be considered
> > compliant?
> >
> > Bryce Fields
> > Web Developer
> > Kentucky Virtual University
> > http://www.kyvu.org/
> >
> > 1-877-740-4357
> > 1-502-573-1555 ext 288
> >
> > "Do or do not. There is no try." -- Yoda
> >
> >
> >
> > ----
> > To subscribe, unsubscribe, suspend, or view list archives,
> > visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
> >
>
>
> ----
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, suspend, or view list archives,
> visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
>
>


----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, suspend, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/

From: Joel Ward
Date: Thu, Sep 04 2003 4:16PM
Subject: Re: Section 508 Standards Compliance and Scripts
← Previous message | Next message →

> Forgive me if I am off base. I am coming into this conversation late.
> IMO, a site is a complete accessibility failure if the content is not
usable for persons with JavaScript off/ with browsers that do not recognize
JavaScript.

I agree.

But some accessibility is better than no accessibility.

And keep in mind there are often "baseline" requirements for web sites that
include a certain browser version and/or browser functionality (e.g.
scripting enabled). Whether these sorts of requirements are valid for
public web sites is up to debate, but the fact is that this happens all of
the time.

While Section 508 is not nearly close to fulfilling Universal Access, it has
at least brough the most basic accessibility standards to the forefront. If
a user with a Javascript-enabled browser can use their assistive technology
to access a site, then at least a portion of the "spirit of the law" is
alive.



----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, suspend, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/

From: Jim Thatcher
Date: Thu, Sep 04 2003 8:30PM
Subject: RE: Section 508 Standards Compliance and Scripts
← Previous message | No next message

Here's a plug for my Side-by-side comparison of WAI Priority 1 checkpoints
and Section 508 at http://jimthatcher.com/sidebyside.htm and the discussion
there about scripting.
It seems to me both simple and clear that to comply with WAI Priority 1
checkpoints, your page has to work with scripting DISABLED. And to comply
with Section 508 Standards one has to assume that scripting is ENABLED but
that the consequences of scripting have to be available to screen readers.
See http://www.jimthatcher.com/webcoursea.htm, for a description of
different categories of scripting and how they work with assistive
technology.

Jim
Accessibility, What Not to do: http://jimthatcher.com/whatnot.htm.
Web Accessibility Tutorial: http://jimthatcher.com/webcourse1.htm.


-----Original Message-----
From: Joel Ward [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 4:11 PM
To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Subject: Re: Section 508 Standards Compliance and Scripts

> Forgive me if I am off base. I am coming into this conversation late.
> IMO, a site is a complete accessibility failure if the content is not
usable for persons with JavaScript off/ with browsers that do not recognize
JavaScript.

I agree.

But some accessibility is better than no accessibility.

And keep in mind there are often "baseline" requirements for web sites that
include a certain browser version and/or browser functionality (e.g.
scripting enabled). Whether these sorts of requirements are valid for
public web sites is up to debate, but the fact is that this happens all of
the time.

While Section 508 is not nearly close to fulfilling Universal Access, it has
at least brough the most basic accessibility standards to the forefront. If
a user with a Javascript-enabled browser can use their assistive technology
to access a site, then at least a portion of the "spirit of the law" is
alive.



----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, suspend, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/




----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, suspend, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/