Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | * EASI: Equal Access to Software & Information |
Date: | Wed, 26 Mar 2003 11:52:46 -0500 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Craig" <[log in to unmask]>
To: "Aaron Smith" <[log in to unmask]>; "W3c-Wai-Ig" <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 11:35 AM
Subject: Re: Web site accessibility
Amen, brother. I wholeheartedly agree. Used correctly, JavaScript can
tremendously add to the user experience. It only becomes a problem when the
developer relies on client-side scripting to complete essential
functionality.
For example: Client-side form modification and validation can save a user an
enormous amount of time and headaches, but it should be supplemented with
server-side control should the client-side behavior not be available.
James
----- Original Message -----
From: "Aaron Smith" <[log in to unmask]>
>
>I have to disagree that this exemplifies how JavaScript is in itself a "bad
>technology." Used in a coherent manner, JavaScript can be quite useful. You
>can make an inaccessible environment in any programming language, so I
>would conclude that this example demonstrates the developers narrow scope
>of various JavaScript coding practices. I do, however, agree with the
>phrase "As long as people have to do extra work for accessibility, it
>'ain't gonna' happen.'" But I don't believe that this is a reflection on
>the language itself.
>
|
|
|