navigation
a webmaster learning community
     Home    Register     Search      Help      Login    
Sponsors

Shopping Cart Software
Ecommerce software integrated into Frontpage, Dreamweaver and Golive templates. No monthly fees and available in ASP and PHP versions.

Website Templates
We also have a wide selection of Dreamweaver, Expression Web and Frontpage templates as well as webmaster tools and CSS layouts.

Frontpage website templates
Creative Website Templates for FrontPage, Dreamweaver, Flash, SwishMax

Search Forums
 

Advanced search
Recent Posts

 Todays Posts
 Most Active posts
 Posts since last visit
 My Recent Posts
 Mark posts read

Microsoft MVP

 

RE: Accesskeys...

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
Printable Version 

All Forums >> Web Development >> Accessibility >> RE: Accesskeys...
Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
 
davidrandall

 

Posts: 82
Joined: 7/28/2005
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/28/2005 12:34:19   
quote:

They spend their dough in pretty much the same proportions as the rest of us.


Indeed they do. I have a friend (Leonie Watson, Chair of the Usability and Accessibility Working Group) who is blind.

quote:

Time and time again we hear that pre Christmas sales are disappointingly low, that high street stores are struggling to meet expected profit margins, yet curiously many of them continue to ignore the 1 in 7 people in the UK who would find the ability to shop easily online the greatest Christmas gift of all.


http://www.nomensa.com/resources/articles/a-christmas-tale.html

as for

quote:

It just that someone who makes a living off the backs of the disabled and disability wants to boost their case.


I find that insulting. I'm a web developer. I build websites. None of my clients (as far as I know) have a registered disability. They are, however, pleased that more people can access their sites should they wish.

(in reply to briesmith)
briesmith

 

Posts: 67
Joined: 2/6/2003
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/28/2005 12:36:45   
This is going nowhere.

I will finish by saying that the case for the truly, genuinely disabled having access to life of quality is undeniable.

The rest is all politics.

(in reply to davidrandall)
jaybee

 

Posts: 14157
Joined: 10/7/2003
From: Berkshire, UK
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/28/2005 13:13:03   
quote:

I will finish by saying that the case for the truly, genuinely disabled having access to life of quality is undeniable.


And I will finish by saying that I will ignore the rudeness and ask one remaining question before I sign off for the night, if you believe they have a right to quality of life then why are you so against putting in the small amount of effort required to enable them to access web sites?

_____________________________

If it ain't broke..... fix it until it is.
:)

:)
GAWDS
Now where did I put that Doctype?

(in reply to briesmith)
dpf

 

Posts: 7121
Joined: 11/12/2003
From: India-napolis
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/28/2005 13:18:25   
quote:

Looking through your posts that does seem to be your forte...
as rudeness appears to be yours.........

_____________________________

Dan

(in reply to briesmith)
Tailslide

 

Posts: 6046
Joined: 5/10/2005
From: Out here on the raggedy edge
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/28/2005 13:21:01   
I will finish by saying that I will continue to try to produce websites that are accessible to as many as possible whilst hopefully remaining attractive (the sites not me - there's no hope for me...).

Every site I do I learn more and I deliberately set out to learn more about this topic - not to make a living off the backs of the disabled but to help make my sites easier for everyone to use whilst earning a small living for myself too. If that sounds a bit too Brady Bunch for you then tough.



_____________________________

"My strategy is so simple an idiot could have devised it"
Little Blue Plane Web Design | Blood, Sweat & Rust - A Land Rover restoration project

(in reply to briesmith)
womble

 

Posts: 5528
Joined: 3/14/2005
From: Living on the edge
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/28/2005 13:39:19   
On the 'skip navigation' issue, I'm just thinking out loud here, it's something I did want to build into my site, but I'm struggling to find somewhere to put it without throwing my layout out. I did wonder if I could do it by just making it the same colour as the background, as it's really there for the benefit of screen readers, but then realised that it would still throw the layout out but leave a 'blank space'. Then I wondered if I could use something similar to one of the image replacement techniques - can't remember what it's called off hand, but it's the one where you simply set the text so it's way off screen so screen readers get it but those using visual browsers don't. Thoughts anyone?

<edit> actually, do they need to be accessible for those not using a mouse? </edit>

_____________________________

~~ "A cruel god ain't no god at all" ~~
:)

(in reply to Tailslide)
jaybee

 

Posts: 14157
Joined: 10/7/2003
From: Berkshire, UK
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/28/2005 13:45:14   
You could put it as the first thing in your li with display:none or you could put it as a small text link somewhere but in the sequencing of the page make sure it comes before them menu li.

I've done it various ways This one is probably the most obvious at the top right.


ooops sorry, I'm not supposed to be here. :)

_____________________________

If it ain't broke..... fix it until it is.
:)

:)
GAWDS
Now where did I put that Doctype?

(in reply to womble)
Tailslide

 

Posts: 6046
Joined: 5/10/2005
From: Out here on the raggedy edge
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/28/2005 13:53:42   
As with everything involved in this topic there's a fair amount of argument about whether skip links should be visible or hidden - if they're visible they can help people who just prefer tabbing around the site plus in theory PDA users would like it as it goes straight to the content.

There's a couple of articles on the topic:
http://www.jimthatcher.com/skipnav.htm
http://diveintoaccessibility.org/day_11_skipping_over_navigation_links.html

I've taken to leaving mine visible currently - but that won't suit everyone's design.

Skip links would be accessible for those non-mouse users - presuming they know they're there. If you hide them make sure you make them visible on focus rather than just invisible to visual browsers all together.

_____________________________

"My strategy is so simple an idiot could have devised it"
Little Blue Plane Web Design | Blood, Sweat & Rust - A Land Rover restoration project

(in reply to jaybee)
womble

 

Posts: 5528
Joined: 3/14/2005
From: Living on the edge
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/28/2005 13:57:07   
As usual, no easy answer :) Think I'll sleep on it and have a play with the different options in the morning.
PS - thanks for the links

_____________________________

~~ "A cruel god ain't no god at all" ~~
:)

(in reply to Tailslide)
BobbyDouglas

 

Posts: 5456
Joined: 5/15/2003
From: Arizona
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/28/2005 14:41:56   
quote:

Here we go again, take a look at this.

- Look at that for what reason? I know already that it would be a waste of time to search around and make sure your site works in every single browser. I would rather spend money on advertising and actually see some ROI. Sorry, but making sure it works in 6 browsers is enough.

quote:

So what are you saying here? You only need to cater for the uninformed?

- Nope, what part didn't you understand?

Sounds like it is time for us web designers to sue browsers for not working correctly.

quote:

What I'm trying to say is acessibility and attractive websites are not mutually exclusive - it takes a bit of research and a bit of planning.

- It takes quite a bit of money. I asked what it would have cost to have the design my site uses in XHTML, the few people I spoke with quoted $200.

quote:

In the world where my customers live, I can explain to them the issues and potential liability. I can offer to improve accessibility for 10% more. The risk and choice is theirs, not mine.

- You will find out that most of your customers will say, where is all that money going to, and how many current users will it benefit? Then when you look at your logs, and tell them how many users will benefit, well... then you won't get the extra work :)

quote:

And where are you living? http://www.csreurope.org/csrinfo/csrdisability/DisabilityFactsandfigures/

- Sorry, but displaying information that does not affect us only makes it look like there is a larger problem than there currently is. When you show facts of people with a disability, provide them for our situation. The total number of people that are legally disabled, doesn't matter, it is the amount that might be disabled to the point where the person can't see, and now uses a different browser, things like that is what we are looking at here. By providing those other facts, it just makes it look like there is a bigger problem than there actually is.

quote:

As with everything involved in this topic there's a fair amount of argument about whether skip links should be visible or hidden - if they're visible they can help people who just prefer tabbing around the site plus in theory PDA users would like it as it goes straight to the content.

- Ohhh skip links. They will never appear on my site. Skip links must be one of the most ugly things I have ever seen on a website. Talk about killing a good design!


[Edit]Just to add, one of my friends who was a hard code accessibility guru like jaybee, decided to stop with her design company because it is no longer brining in money. She has done radio/newspaper ads that advertised the "accessbility in web design" but it seemed to bring in very few people. Sounds like there are stilll a lot of people out their that just don't want to do anything.

Imagine what has to be done to software such as OsCommerce to make it up to par. I spend a good 8 hours just converting my helpdesk over to XHTML 1.0 Strict. I couldn't even believe how much time it would take to take on a larger task.

< Message edited by BobbyDouglas -- 7/28/2005 15:14:21 >


_____________________________

Arizona Web Design - Mr Bobs Web Design in Arizona
The Arizona Web Hosting Challenge

(in reply to womble)
davidrandall

 

Posts: 82
Joined: 7/28/2005
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/29/2005 7:36:22   
quote:

I bow to the greater knowledge of the Usability & Accessibility (UA) Working Group


Never been bowed to before :)

(in reply to BobbyDouglas)
davids

 

Posts: 211
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Belgium (American)
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/29/2005 8:08:15   
Well, I've never been a group, so I guess you're twice blessed. :)

Seriously, I am disappointed that a thread that started off with some interesting points got so dragged down into mis-information and haughty piety. I didn't stop my subscription in the hope that the voice of reason would finally re-emerge.

Thanks, BobbyDouglas, for jumping back in!

After 71 postings I have no facts that I could use to convince customers to change their priorities.
How many people have disbilities that actually prevent them from using a site? Dunno
How many people are actually using an alternative browser due to a disability? No clue
What lost market potential does that actually represent? Who knows.

This has just been a classical form of argumentation where proponents throw out exagerated or irrelevant numbers and then say "Well, if even one person is inconvenienced, then you've failed."

Color-blindnesses prevents many more people from fully utilizing web sites than true disabilities, but how many designers even discuss that with their customers?

My customers expect business answers from me, not platitudes or arguments that don't add up. They can "see" through that as well as I can.

_____________________________

Davids
International Relocation Technology

(in reply to davidrandall)
davidrandall

 

Posts: 82
Joined: 7/28/2005
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/29/2005 8:11:10   
quote:

Color-blindnesses prevents many more people from fully utilizing web sites than true disabilities, but how many designers even discuss that with their customers?


I do.

(in reply to davids)
davidrandall

 

Posts: 82
Joined: 7/28/2005
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/29/2005 8:20:29   
quote:

After 71 postings I have no facts that I could use to convince customers to change their priorities.



quote:


Why Should I make an Accessible Website?

The advantages of having an accessible website are numerous and fall into four key categories.

Business benefits

Many organisations are now realising the importance of website accessibility and are taking steps to modify their existing website. However, a startling number are not. They say that impaired people do not access their website so why should they make it accessible? Quite simply, impaired users do not access their website because they may be unable to.

When it comes to internet users with some form of impairment that may prevent them accessing a website easily, the statistics are somewhat startling:

· 10 million - The number of people with some form of registered disability in the United Kingdom
· 2 million - The number of UK residents with sight problems
· One in 12 men and one in 200 women have some form of colour blindness

Admittedly there is likely to be some overlap within these groups, however, these groups provide a total of approximately 48% of the UK population who could potentially have difficulty in using a website.

The combined spending power of these people is estimated to be £80 billion.
People who use the internet do so using a variety of technologies. People may use browsers that do not support images or other visual components of websites. An accessible website will still be usable by people who may not have the latest software installed, or programs downloaded to view the website as the designer intended.

Similarly, an accessible website will be compatible with new technologies. Users may be trying to access a website using a Personal Digital Assistant (PDA), a mobile telephone, webTV or an in-car browser. It is estimated that over one third of the world’s population will own a wireless device by 2008.

People, generally, are impatient when they use the internet. As of May 2005, only 49% of people accessing the internet in the UK did so via broadband. A website that has been designed with accessibility in mind will load significantly faster.

It is not only impaired users who may experience difficulty in using a website. Other users who will benefit from an accessible website include:

· The elderly
· Children
· People whose first language is not English
· People who are from outside your industry
· People who may not understand technical phrases or jargon

A good level of accessibility can significantly enhance the usability of a website. The easier someone finds the experience of visiting a website, the more likely they are to become both a customer and an advocate. It will also improve the efficiency of the time people spend on a site and their ability to complete tasks such as purchasing products.

A website that is accessible for a person to use is also more accessible to search engines, and it is very likely to improve your search engine ranking.


Search engine benefits

It is an obvious fact if your website is ranked highly by the search engines, the more people will view your site. Internet users generally tend to view only the first few pages of their search results, and will try another search if they do not find what they are looking for.

Search engines rank websites by order of importance. The more important a search engine thinks a website is, the higher it will be listed. It is impossible to explain exactly how search engines rank websites, as there are over one hundred different factors that are taken into consideration.

A search engine sends a small programme onto the internet known as a spider or robot. This spider reads the content of every page of every website on the internet.

When an internet user enters key words to make a search, the search engine takes the information from the spider and lists the websites it thinks are important and relevant to what the user is searching for.

An accessible website is not only easier for people to access and navigate – search engine spiders will able to read the content of the web page much more easily.

Computers cannot understand and interpret the meaning of images, animations, movies or audio content that might commonly be found in web pages. An accessible website will provide alternative content for these. The search engine is able to understand and interpret that alternative content and will be able to decide what that website is about, and how important it is.

In the same way that language has rules of grammar and spelling, website code has its own "grammar". Using website code that is compliant to the World Wide Web Consortium standards will create a website that is clean and free from errors. As a result, it is easily read by the search engine spiders.


Legal benefits

The Disability Discrimination Act (UK) makes it unlawful for an organisation to provide a lesser service to somebody who may be impaired. A website is considered to be one of the services that is provided by the organisation.

If an organisation does not take steps to improve the accessibility of their website, they can be found in breach of the Act and may face legal proceedings as a result.

An organisation who has modified or redeveloped their website with accessibility in mind is showing that they have made reasonable adjustments to the service they are providing.


Moral benefits

Organisations who embrace website accessibility are, at the time of writing, in the minority. There is a great deal of confusion about what makes a website accessible due to misinformation and ignorance.

The internet is the largest information resource in the world, and it continues to grow exponentially. People should not be denied access to this resource simply because of an impairment and outdated website design practices.

Website accessibility, in general, is about doing the right thing.


Hope this helps

(in reply to davidrandall)
caz

 

Posts: 3520
Joined: 10/10/2001
From: Somewhere south of Chester, UK
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/29/2005 8:23:51   
quote:

ORIGINAL: davidrandall

quote:

Color-blindnesses prevents many more people from fully utilizing web sites than true disabilities, but how many designers even discuss that with their customers?


I do.


Me too and although I don't define access keys, due to their potential for confusion, I do discuss the general area of accessibility and it's impact on the site design and the legal position of site owners. I have yet to find a client who does not want to do the best they can for all potential users, because the cost is minimal and I guess that they are just aware of the world outside web sites.

_____________________________

Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will dance, or more on your keyboard.
Cheshire cat. www.doracat.co.uk

I remember when it took less than 4hrs to fly across the Atlantic.

(in reply to davidrandall)
davids

 

Posts: 211
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Belgium (American)
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/29/2005 8:35:02   
quote:

total of approximately 48% of the UK population who could potentially have difficulty in using a website.
You see, David, this is exactly what I am talking about. I lived in the UK for 2 years and I know that half the population is not impaired to an extent that keeps them from using websites. No one is going to believe a statement like that. It absolutely undermines the credibility of any other statement on your page.

Which, again, has been the problem with this entire thread.

_____________________________

Davids
International Relocation Technology

(in reply to davidrandall)
briesmith

 

Posts: 67
Joined: 2/6/2003
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/29/2005 8:36:02   
We have now moved from inquiry through argument to fantasy.

quote:

approximately 48% of the UK population (who could) potentially have difficulty in using a website.


In your dreams.

And PS this sort of thing doesn't help

"Our paid for web accessibility consultancy services" - RNIB website (my emphasis).

And that really is my final contribution.

(in reply to caz)
caz

 

Posts: 3520
Joined: 10/10/2001
From: Somewhere south of Chester, UK
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/29/2005 9:04:55   
quote:

ORIGINAL: davids

I lived in the UK for 2 years and I know that half the population is not impaired to an extent that keeps them from using websites.


I've lived here all my life and I don't know half the population - at a guess 20-30 million people?

_____________________________

Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will dance, or more on your keyboard.
Cheshire cat. www.doracat.co.uk

I remember when it took less than 4hrs to fly across the Atlantic.

(in reply to davids)
davids

 

Posts: 211
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Belgium (American)
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/29/2005 9:10:59   
quote:

I've lived here all my life and I don't know half the population
Ok, you called my bluff. Actually I meant half the population of Great Bookham. KT23 4HE to be precise. :)

_____________________________

Davids
International Relocation Technology

(in reply to caz)
Donkey

 

Posts: 3869
Joined: 11/13/2001
From: Blackfield United Kingdom
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/29/2005 10:22:53   
While I agree that accessibility is a good thing and accessible sites are a desirable aim, I think this thread is rather over egging the pudding.

There is a distinct tendency of well meaning people to zealously push for what they believe in and over-sell the proposition. In the "accessibility industry" this is happening on-line and in the real world. My local supermarket was a Safeway; they always had more than adequate spaces for disabled drivers - most spaces were always empty. Now they have become a Morrisons and they have promptly tripled the space for disabled drivers and increased the rarely used mother and child bays. Consequently half the carpark (the half nearest the store) is permanently empty. It is utter madness, there are just not enough disabled drivers (even with the fairly loose requirement neccessary to obtain a disabled driver badge) for the space provided. Presumably they are hoping for mass visit of the legless at some time in the future, but it's not going to happen. When I dared to complain about this the manager treated me as though I was some sort of heartless beast.

So if I continue shopping there I, like most other visitors, will have to walk halfway across the carpark (twice) probably in the rain because the people who own the supermarket want to be politically correct.

I think the decision on how far to go with accessibility with a web site should be made in relation to the target market and the historic user data (if any exists), but with the proviso that the minimum legal requirements (however onerous) are met for the areas that are important. i.e. the US, Europe, and the country in which you operate.

No matter how desirable it is to make your site equally accessible to everyone there is a cost involved and AFAIC practicality must come before idealism.

_____________________________

:)

I have a higher and grander standard of principle than George Washington. He could not lie; I can, but I won't.
Samuel Clemens

(in reply to davids)
briesmith

 

Posts: 67
Joined: 2/6/2003
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/29/2005 10:39:02   
Grrr - it keeps draggng me back.

No one said they "knew half THE population..." what was said was that he "knew THAT half the population..."

And anyway, are YOU saying that half the population IS disabled or aren't you?

It would help if you and your supporters at least tried to put some numbers to the questions asked.

How many people have a disability that directly affects their use of the internet?

How many people in this group are so disabled they cannot use the internet? (The profoundly deaf and totally blind, the severely brain damaged with no intellectual capability and so on)

Of the remainder in the disabled group how many use the internet; how do they use the internet (hardware and software), broken down by disability type and areas of interest (ie the sites/pages they visit)?

My bet is that none of you have a clue and nor do any of the vast numbers of people on the disability bandwagon. Which at the end of the day is really bad news for the disabled.

(in reply to Donkey)
Tailslide

 

Posts: 6046
Joined: 5/10/2005
From: Out here on the raggedy edge
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/29/2005 10:48:42   
Two points I think:

Firstly, I honestly believe that all you need to do is code sensibly and your site will be accessible to most - doesn't take any fancy expensive extra stuff. Use valid code and label stuff

Secondly, I also believe that like anything there are people cashing in on the subject. There is a company in the UK currently that offers accessibility reports that many local authorities have signed up to. It produces an "accessibility table" (actually it's just stopped doing this but still...) of local authority sites that obviously the authorities had to pay through the teeth to sign up to.

These reports were branding perfectly reasonable sites as failures and designers that had followed the recommendations laid down on accessibility were getting it in the neck - this is not a good thing.

I tried using this company's free reports on one of my sites just to see what happened - it failed it saying it didn't validate against the DOCTYPE - actually it did validate against the declared doctype on the site, they were actually testing it against the wrong DOCTYPE!! This gives an idea of how useful those test are in general.

My point is that yes there are "cowboys" out there touting accessibility as their expertise and companies are getting sucked into it. That fact still doesn't detract from the point that accessibility in general is a GOOD THING and not massively hard to achieve given a little thought and decent coding.

_____________________________

"My strategy is so simple an idiot could have devised it"
Little Blue Plane Web Design | Blood, Sweat & Rust - A Land Rover restoration project

(in reply to Donkey)
jaybee

 

Posts: 14157
Joined: 10/7/2003
From: Berkshire, UK
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/29/2005 11:16:53   
quote:

How many people in this group are so disabled they cannot use the internet? (The profoundly deaf and totally blind,


And there is precisely the statement I've been waiting for. You have just made it abundantly clear that you don't understand the basic problem.

The profoundly deaf and the totally blind can and do use the internet. They are the people using the specialist browsers and they are the ones this entire thread is about, making your site accessible so that they can use the internet via their readers.

Bobby D I am not going to argue with you this time. You made it perfectly clear what your feelings were the last time we discussed this ie. there's no business case for it and therefore you don't want to spend the time/money.

I'm surprised however that you had to get someone else to quote for revamping your site for XHTML. I would have thought that you'd know HTML well enough to understand that XHTML is not much different and you ought to be able to convert it in an afternoon.

quote:

That fact still doesn't detract from the point that accessibility in general is a GOOD THING and not massively hard to achieve given a little thought and decent coding.


The other fact is that it's the law so even if you don't want to do it from a moral standpoint you ought to do from a legal one.

< Message edited by jaybee -- 7/29/2005 11:24:04 >


_____________________________

If it ain't broke..... fix it until it is.
:)

:)
GAWDS
Now where did I put that Doctype?

(in reply to Tailslide)
jaybee

 

Posts: 14157
Joined: 10/7/2003
From: Berkshire, UK
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/29/2005 11:18:34   
quote:

I, like most other visitors, will have to walk halfway across the carpark (twice) probably in the rain because the people who own the supermarket want to be politically correct.


No, that's not the reason. I phoned them and told them you needed the exercise. :)

_____________________________

If it ain't broke..... fix it until it is.
:)

:)
GAWDS
Now where did I put that Doctype?

(in reply to jaybee)
caz

 

Posts: 3520
Joined: 10/10/2001
From: Somewhere south of Chester, UK
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/29/2005 11:19:27   
quote:

accessibility in general is a GOOD THING and not massively hard to achieve given a little thought and decent coding.


Thanks for repeating this again, Tailslide. IMO it bears repeating, again and again and...number crunchers could try the Government statistics offices and ask them why they don't collect the detailed statistics that seem to be required. Or, maybe they do but they are not accessible:)

_____________________________

Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will dance, or more on your keyboard.
Cheshire cat. www.doracat.co.uk

I remember when it took less than 4hrs to fly across the Atlantic.

(in reply to Tailslide)
davids

 

Posts: 211
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Belgium (American)
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/29/2005 11:28:25   
So far, I only argued on the benefits side of this. Now I'll really get myself in trouble by turning to the costs side at the risk of being way off-topic.

What I understand is that the site should be accessible to a text-only browser. That's fine, because I already build to ensure Google can index the site. No java menus, no Flash, no text embedded in images, using alt text.

Now, the harder requirement I've read here is to use strict XHTML and CSS. I have wasted many, many hours trying to design sites this way. CSS for formatting is great; CSS for layout is just not ready for prime time, IMHO. Doing some relatively simple things in CSS, like vertically centering text in a div requires this hack and that hack, and looking on yet another blog to find another hack.

If that is the cost of accessibility, then that will be an obstacle for some time to come, I'm afraid.

_____________________________

Davids
International Relocation Technology

(in reply to Tailslide)
briesmith

 

Posts: 67
Joined: 2/6/2003
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/29/2005 11:32:16   
I was referring to people who are both profoudly deaf and totally blind, ie the same people at the same time. Not two classes of people but one.

As probably one of the few professionals on these boards to have developed a computer system based on a screen reader for a totally blind man (piano tuner) and his wife (sighted) I would claim to have some experience here.

Disability is a spectrum not an absolute. At one end there will be those in PVS, plegics with absolutely no motor function whatsoever, poor devils in the terminal stages of illness prostrated by depression, resignation, pain control whatever and at the other end there will be those with only one good eye, or ear, or worn out ankles, knees, hips, elbows or a friendly GP or at least a good story to tell him, that most of us wouldn't class as disabled at all.

In between are the genuinely disabled who are using the internet or would like to. They're the people we need to know about.

And if they're insisting on using Apples or some bloody browser no one's ever heard of or refuse to upgrade their software or are adopting any other bloody minded posture then sod 'em.

The rest I want to hear about.

(in reply to caz)
dpf

 

Posts: 7121
Joined: 11/12/2003
From: India-napolis
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/29/2005 11:33:16   
when a blind surfer views a site with a text reader, do they care and are they even informed about the layout? is text their only concern? I wonder - does a blind person benefit from being told that there is a picture that they cannot see? my point is I wonder if the whole area could be made simpler if the w3c sponsored a tag <textreader> and developers simply put all the sites text in that area and the screen readers simply looked there instead of having to scramble through code variations. Is that an oversimplification?

_____________________________

Dan

(in reply to davids)
jaybee

 

Posts: 14157
Joined: 10/7/2003
From: Berkshire, UK
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/29/2005 11:37:06   
quote:

No java menus, no Flash, no text embedded in images, using alt text.


Then you're pretty much there. You don't need to use CSS for layout. It would be good but everyone recognises there are issues and a learning curve. It is perfectly possible to get tables set up for readers and use css to format them.

The law, in the UK, states that sites should be WCAG 1 as a minimum. Basically that means making sure your code is valid whether you use HTML or XHTML and css for fonts/colours etc.

Hitting WCAG1 is not difficult. WCAG2 takes more effort, WCAG3 (depending on what you have on your site) can be near impossible without a lot of work.



_____________________________

If it ain't broke..... fix it until it is.
:)

:)
GAWDS
Now where did I put that Doctype?

(in reply to davids)
Tailslide

 

Posts: 6046
Joined: 5/10/2005
From: Out here on the raggedy edge
Status: offline

 
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/29/2005 11:44:30   
quote:

ORIGINAL: davids

Now, the harder requirement I've read here is to use strict XHTML and CSS. I have wasted many, many hours trying to design sites this way. CSS for formatting is great; CSS for layout is just not ready for prime time, IMHO. Doing some relatively simple things in CSS, like vertically centering text in a div requires this hack and that hack, and looking on yet another blog to find another hack.

If that is the cost of accessibility, then that will be an obstacle for some time to come, I'm afraid.


Like everything it does take a while to learn. There are a few, recurring problems that can take time to get round the first time you come across them - it gets much easier with practice (and lots of bookmarks!).

Even if you stick with HTML and tables there are things you can do. All I'm saying is that you should make the effort to the best of your ability - if that's just a case of using Alt tags and labelling tables then do that. What I don't understand is people who don't bother at all.

If you're designing for a site that may be liable to be sued under the DDA then you have no choice but to go the whole hog on accessibility and make sure the site meets current recommendations.

_____________________________

"My strategy is so simple an idiot could have devised it"
Little Blue Plane Web Design | Blood, Sweat & Rust - A Land Rover restoration project

(in reply to davids)
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

All Forums >> Web Development >> Accessibility >> RE: Accesskeys...
Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to: 1





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts