Re: Please review my site

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Chaddy2222, Jun 27, 2007.

  1. Chaddy2222

    Chaddy2222 Guest

    On Jun 27, 4:41 pm, ""
    <> wrote:
    > On Jun 27, 2:04 am, Jim Moe <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > > wrote:

    >
    > > > putting myself out on a limb.
    > > > i am just starting life as a freelance web designer, and would value
    > > > any (nice) feedback on my site
    > > >www.motivateddesign.co.uk

    >
    > > Your graphics design and color scheme is quite nice, appealing. (That
    > > was nice.)

    >
    > > Your page markup is not so good.
    > > - Use of XHTML, and why Transitional?
    > > Are you generating the Web pages from an XML source with XSLT? And is
    > > that same XML source generating print output or PDF? If not, there is no
    > > reason to use XHTML. Use HTML Strict instead.
    > > - The body text size is 12 px, 75% of my preferred size, and too damn
    > > small to read.
    > > - Fixed width design.
    > > - The layout degrades to unreadability in places when to font size is
    > > increased even by 120%. Particularly noticeable on the Services page.
    > > - Div-itis: Replacing standard markup elements with CSS-defined classes
    > > that do the same thing. E.g.: .h1, .h2., .h3. There is a net loss of
    > > information since HTML, the HyperText MARKUP Language, is not being used
    > > to mark up much.
    > > - Replacing block elements (h1, h2, p) with a <span>, in inline element.
    > > What's with that?
    > > - The W3C logos mean nothing to most people, and is simply expected by
    > > those who do know what they represent.

    >
    > > --
    > > jmm (hyphen) list (at) sohnen-moe (dot) com
    > > (Remove .AXSPAMGN for email)

    >
    > Thanks everyone for your advice,
    >
    > I have spent the last 5 years teaching computer science in school, and
    > have had enough.
    > Then had a bright idea, you used to be a web designer, may be I should
    > do that again.
    > But that was in the days of the good old table and I am learning CSS
    > stuff as a go along.
    > Teaching does not (in my experience) allow time to learn interesting
    > new stuff.
    >
    > I will try to make all of the recommended changes and if I feel brave
    > post the site again for another going over.
    >
    > Regards and thanks again
    >
    > Barry.

    You should also read, http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/full-checklist.html
    web accessibility is now law in the UK as well as other countries.
    --
    Regards Chad. http://freewebdesign.awardspace.biz
    Chaddy2222, Jun 27, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Chaddy2222

    Chaddy2222 Guest

    Web Accessibility Checklist was Re: Please review my site

    On Jun 27, 5:20 pm, Chaddy2222 <spamlovermailbox-
    > wrote:
    > On Jun 27, 4:41 pm, ""
    >
    >
    >
    > <> wrote:
    > > On Jun 27, 2:04 am, Jim Moe <> wrote:

    >
    > > > wrote:

    >
    > > > > putting myself out on a limb.
    > > > > i am just starting life as a freelance web designer, and would value
    > > > > any (nice) feedback on my site
    > > > >www.motivateddesign.co.uk

    >
    > > > Your graphics design and color scheme is quite nice, appealing. (That
    > > > was nice.)

    >
    > > > Your page markup is not so good.
    > > > - Use of XHTML, and why Transitional?
    > > > Are you generating the Web pages from an XML source with XSLT? And is
    > > > that same XML source generating print output or PDF? If not, there is no
    > > > reason to use XHTML. Use HTML Strict instead.
    > > > - The body text size is 12 px, 75% of my preferred size, and too damn
    > > > small to read.
    > > > - Fixed width design.
    > > > - The layout degrades to unreadability in places when to font size is
    > > > increased even by 120%. Particularly noticeable on the Services page.
    > > > - Div-itis: Replacing standard markup elements with CSS-defined classes
    > > > that do the same thing. E.g.: .h1, .h2., .h3. There is a net loss of
    > > > information since HTML, the HyperText MARKUP Language, is not being used
    > > > to mark up much.
    > > > - Replacing block elements (h1, h2, p) with a <span>, in inline element.
    > > > What's with that?
    > > > - The W3C logos mean nothing to most people, and is simply expected by
    > > > those who do know what they represent.

    >
    > > > --
    > > > jmm (hyphen) list (at) sohnen-moe (dot) com
    > > > (Remove .AXSPAMGN for email)

    >
    > > Thanks everyone for your advice,

    >
    > > I have spent the last 5 years teaching computer science in school, and
    > > have had enough.
    > > Then had a bright idea, you used to be a web designer, may be I should
    > > do that again.
    > > But that was in the days of the good old table and I am learning CSS
    > > stuff as a go along.
    > > Teaching does not (in my experience) allow time to learn interesting
    > > new stuff.

    >
    > > I will try to make all of the recommended changes and if I feel brave
    > > post the site again for another going over.

    >
    > > Regards and thanks again

    >
    > > Barry.

    >
    > You should also read,http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/full-checklist.html
    > web accessibility is now law in the UK as well as other countries.
    >

    Ahh, why I made this a new thread and posted it to these other groups
    i'm not quite sure but I will / have changed the subject line to make
    it read better.
    --
    Regards Chad. http://freewebdesign.awardspace.biz
    Chaddy2222, Jun 27, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Chaddy2222

    Guest

    Re: Web Accessibility Checklist was Re: Please review my site

    On Jun 27, 8:30 am, Chaddy2222 <spamlovermailbox-
    > wrote:
    > On Jun 27, 5:20 pm, Chaddy2222 <spamlovermailbox-
    >
    > > wrote:
    > > On Jun 27, 4:41 pm, ""

    >
    > > <> wrote:
    > > > On Jun 27, 2:04 am, Jim Moe <> wrote:

    >
    > > > > wrote:

    >
    > > > > > putting myself out on a limb.
    > > > > > i am just starting life as a freelance web designer, and would value
    > > > > > any (nice) feedback on my site
    > > > > >www.motivateddesign.co.uk

    >
    > > > > Your graphics design and color scheme is quite nice, appealing. (That
    > > > > was nice.)

    >
    > > > > Your page markup is not so good.
    > > > > - Use of XHTML, and why Transitional?
    > > > > Are you generating the Web pages from an XML source with XSLT? And is
    > > > > that same XML source generating print output or PDF? If not, there is no
    > > > > reason to use XHTML. Use HTML Strict instead.
    > > > > - The body text size is 12 px, 75% of my preferred size, and too damn
    > > > > small to read.
    > > > > - Fixed width design.
    > > > > - The layout degrades to unreadability in places when to font size is
    > > > > increased even by 120%. Particularly noticeable on the Services page.
    > > > > - Div-itis: Replacing standard markup elements with CSS-defined classes
    > > > > that do the same thing. E.g.: .h1, .h2., .h3. There is a net loss of
    > > > > information since HTML, the HyperText MARKUP Language, is not being used
    > > > > to mark up much.
    > > > > - Replacing block elements (h1, h2, p) with a <span>, in inline element.
    > > > > What's with that?
    > > > > - The W3C logos mean nothing to most people, and is simply expected by
    > > > > those who do know what they represent.

    >
    > > > > --
    > > > > jmm (hyphen) list (at) sohnen-moe (dot) com
    > > > > (Remove .AXSPAMGN for email)

    >
    > > > Thanks everyone for your advice,

    >
    > > > I have spent the last 5 years teaching computer science in school, and
    > > > have had enough.
    > > > Then had a bright idea, you used to be a web designer, may be I should
    > > > do that again.
    > > > But that was in the days of the good old table and I am learning CSS
    > > > stuff as a go along.
    > > > Teaching does not (in my experience) allow time to learn interesting
    > > > new stuff.

    >
    > > > I will try to make all of the recommended changes and if I feel brave
    > > > post the site again for another going over.

    >
    > > > Regards and thanks again

    >
    > > > Barry.

    >
    > > You should also read,http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/full-checklist.html
    > > web accessibility is now law in the UK as well as other countries.

    >
    > Ahh, why I made this a new thread and posted it to these other groups
    > i'm not quite sure but I will / have changed the subject line to make
    > it read better.
    > --
    > Regards Chad.http://freewebdesign.awardspace.biz


    Thank Chad,

    I have looked at the document and think I understand most of it.
    Are there any good books on this subject?

    Thanks

    Barry
    , Jun 27, 2007
    #3
  4. Chaddy2222

    Chaddy2222 Guest

    Re: Web Accessibility Checklist was Re: Please review my site

    On Jun 27, 5:39 pm, ""
    <> wrote:
    > On Jun 27, 8:30 am, Chaddy2222 <spamlovermailbox-
    >
    >
    >
    > > wrote:
    > > On Jun 27, 5:20 pm, Chaddy2222 <spamlovermailbox-

    >
    > > > wrote:
    > > > On Jun 27, 4:41 pm, ""

    >
    > > > <> wrote:
    > > > > On Jun 27, 2:04 am, Jim Moe <> wrote:

    >
    > > > > > wrote:

    >
    > > > > > > putting myself out on a limb.
    > > > > > > i am just starting life as a freelance web designer, and would value
    > > > > > > any (nice) feedback on my site
    > > > > > >www.motivateddesign.co.uk

    >
    > > > > > Your graphics design and color scheme is quite nice, appealing. (That
    > > > > > was nice.)

    >
    > > > > > Your page markup is not so good.
    > > > > > - Use of XHTML, and why Transitional?
    > > > > > Are you generating the Web pages from an XML source with XSLT? And is
    > > > > > that same XML source generating print output or PDF? If not, there is no
    > > > > > reason to use XHTML. Use HTML Strict instead.
    > > > > > - The body text size is 12 px, 75% of my preferred size, and too damn
    > > > > > small to read.
    > > > > > - Fixed width design.
    > > > > > - The layout degrades to unreadability in places when to font size is
    > > > > > increased even by 120%. Particularly noticeable on the Services page.
    > > > > > - Div-itis: Replacing standard markup elements with CSS-defined classes
    > > > > > that do the same thing. E.g.: .h1, .h2., .h3. There is a net loss of
    > > > > > information since HTML, the HyperText MARKUP Language, is not being used
    > > > > > to mark up much.
    > > > > > - Replacing block elements (h1, h2, p) with a <span>, in inline element.
    > > > > > What's with that?
    > > > > > - The W3C logos mean nothing to most people, and is simply expected by
    > > > > > those who do know what they represent.

    >
    > > > > > --
    > > > > > jmm (hyphen) list (at) sohnen-moe (dot) com
    > > > > > (Remove .AXSPAMGN for email)

    >
    > > > > Thanks everyone for your advice,

    >
    > > > > I have spent the last 5 years teaching computer science in school, and
    > > > > have had enough.
    > > > > Then had a bright idea, you used to be a web designer, may be I should
    > > > > do that again.
    > > > > But that was in the days of the good old table and I am learning CSS
    > > > > stuff as a go along.
    > > > > Teaching does not (in my experience) allow time to learn interesting
    > > > > new stuff.

    >
    > > > > I will try to make all of the recommended changes and if I feel brave
    > > > > post the site again for another going over.

    >
    > > > > Regards and thanks again

    >
    > > > > Barry.

    >
    > > > You should also read,http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/full-checklist.html
    > > > web accessibility is now law in the UK as well as other countries.

    >
    > > Ahh, why I made this a new thread and posted it to these other groups
    > > i'm not quite sure but I will / have changed the subject line to make
    > > it read better.
    > > --
    > > Regards Chad.http://freewebdesign.awardspace.biz

    >
    > Thank Chad,
    >
    > I have looked at the document and think I understand most of it.
    > Are there any good books on this subject?
    >
    > Thanks
    >
    > Barry

    Hi Bary, the full WCAG document can be found here http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/
    and if you want a good general book on web design, then check out
    http://www.webpagesthatsuck.com
    I hope that helps.
    --
    Regards Chad. http://freewebdesign.awardspace.biz
    Chaddy2222, Jun 27, 2007
    #4
  5. Chaddy2222

    Andy Dingley Guest

    On 27 Jun, 08:20, Chaddy2222 <>
    wrote:

    > You should also read,http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/full-checklist.html
    > web accessibility is now law in the UK as well as other countries.


    It's a good idea to study accessibility, but the W3C are not a good
    resource for it. You'd be much better off with Joe Clark's book (free
    online)
    Andy Dingley, Jun 27, 2007
    #5
  6. Chaddy2222

    Guest

    On Jun 27, 11:00 am, Andy Dingley <> wrote:
    > On 27 Jun, 08:20, Chaddy2222 <>
    > wrote:
    >
    > > You should also read,http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/full-checklist.html
    > > web accessibility is now law in the UK as well as other countries.

    >
    > It's a good idea to study accessibility, but the W3C are not a good
    > resource for it. You'd be much better off with Joe Clark's book (free
    > online)


    Thanks for that,

    I had a look at Joe Clark's book - The information looks good, but I
    have trouble reading it because of the serif font used on screen.
    I may just buy it.

    Regards

    Barry
    , Jun 27, 2007
    #6
  7. Chaddy2222

    Chaddy2222 Guest

    On Jun 27, 8:00 pm, Andy Dingley <> wrote:
    > On 27 Jun, 08:20, Chaddy2222 <>
    > wrote:
    >
    > > You should also read,http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/full-checklist.html
    > > web accessibility is now law in the UK as well as other countries.

    >
    > It's a good idea to study accessibility, but the W3C are not a good
    > resource for it. You'd be much better off with Joe Clark's book (free
    > online)

    Thanks for that suggestion Andy. I must say after Googleing Joe Clark,
    I came across his article on WCAG 2.0 and found it interesting. After
    reading parts of the final draft I actually did not think it was that
    bad but after reading what J C said / wrote on the topic I is not
    convinced that the new guidelines will be any good. Actually I thought
    the 1.0 guidelines were bad enough about not being understand, but
    these new ones will just not help anyone (from what I have read). How
    the hell would a law enforcement agency decide on what all those long
    worded statements on multimedia meant, (especially with cases
    concerning where some thing are allowed or not).
    In fact it could be said that these new guidelines are a step
    backwards as they do not recommend the separation of presentation and
    content.


    --
    Regards Chad. http://freewebdesign.awardspace.biz
    Chaddy2222, Jun 27, 2007
    #7
  8. Chaddy2222

    Andy Dingley Guest

    Re: Web Accessibility Checklist was Re: Please review my site

    On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 00:30:04 -0700, Chaddy2222
    <> wrote:

    >> You should also read,http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/full-checklist.html
    >> web accessibility is now law in the UK as well as other countries.


    I've just noticed that the WCAG Samurai (which includes Joe Clark) have
    recently published their errata to the WCAG guidelines
    http://wcagsamurai.org/

    This is an introduction to the errata (corrections) for the Web Content
    Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 (WCAG 1). The errata are published by, and
    can be attributed to, the WCAG Samurai, an independent group of
    developers convened in 2006. We delivered these errata on 2007.06.07.

    I just love this document, particularly the no-nonsense tone of the
    intro :cool:
    http://wcagsamurai.org/errata/intro.html
    Andy Dingley, Jun 27, 2007
    #8
  9. Chaddy2222

    Chaddy2222 Guest

    Re: Web Accessibility Checklist was Re: Please review my site

    Andy Dingley wrote:
    > On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 00:30:04 -0700, Chaddy2222
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > >> You should also read,http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/full-checklist.html
    > >> web accessibility is now law in the UK as well as other countries.

    >
    > I've just noticed that the WCAG Samurai (which includes Joe Clark) have
    > recently published their errata to the WCAG guidelines
    > http://wcagsamurai.org/
    >
    > This is an introduction to the errata (corrections) for the Web Content
    > Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 (WCAG 1). The errata are published by, and
    > can be attributed to, the WCAG Samurai, an independent group of
    > developers convened in 2006. We delivered these errata on 2007.06.07.
    >
    > I just love this document, particularly the no-nonsense tone of the
    > intro :cool:
    > http://wcagsamurai.org/errata/intro.html

    Hmmm, yes I had a read of that. It sounds good although one thing I am
    not sure of is how exactly they want developers to make javascript and
    such content accessible without placeing items in a <noscript> tag, as
    screen reading software still does not do JS very well. Unless it
    could be done through some kind of server side method?.
    --
    Regards Chad. http://freewebdesign.awardspace.biz
    Chaddy2222, Jun 28, 2007
    #9
  10. Chaddy2222

    Andy Dingley Guest

    Re: Web Accessibility Checklist was Re: Please review my site

    On 28 Jun, 08:38, Chaddy2222 <>
    wrote:

    > Hmmm, yes I had a read of that. It sounds good although one thing I am
    > not sure of is how exactly they want developers to make javascript and
    > such content accessible without placeing items in a <noscript> tag,


    <noscript> never really worked, was never really appropriate, and was
    almost never used correctly.

    The basic rule for JavaScript on Web 1.0 pages is that it should never
    be necessary. use it for rollovers, decoration, gimmickery etc. but
    lay off using it for the core function. In these cases, you don't need
    to dupe it into <noscript> at all.

    There are very few cases where JavaScript can be replaced by
    <noscript>. If you're using client-side JavaScript to generate
    content, then it's usually simply better to do this server-side
    anyway. You might (in WCAG world) have to do just this to populate the
    <noscript> that you'd be better off avoiding the need for altogether.

    Web 2.0 is different. If you're AJAXing your content into place with
    asynch loads, then there's just no way to replace that with any sort
    of static notice in a <noscript>. The fix here is to fall back to a
    Web 1.0 implementation instead, with lots of <form>s, page submissions
    and round-tripping the whole page back to the server. This gets
    really messy to try and cover both patterns on a single page, so
    you're often better doing it as two separates.

    There's never a need to make any _page_ accessible -- it's always an
    alternative to offer an accessible page _in_addition_. Although good
    CSS techniques make this costly process unneccessary for general
    design work, it can be a reasonable approach when you're doing AJAX
    and similar work.

    If you're going this deeply into things, you really need to be using
    an MVC pattern too. You'll maybe build it without, but you wouldn't
    want to maintain it afterwards.
    Andy Dingley, Jun 28, 2007
    #10
  11. Chaddy2222

    Chaddy2222 Guest

    Re: Web Accessibility Checklist was Re: Please review my site

    On Jun 28, 8:22 pm, Andy Dingley <> wrote:
    > On 28 Jun, 08:38, Chaddy2222 <>
    > wrote:
    >
    > > Hmmm, yes I had a read of that. It sounds good although one thing I am
    > > not sure of is how exactly they want developers to make javascript and
    > > such content accessible without placeing items in a <noscript> tag,

    >
    > <noscript> never really worked, was never really appropriate, and was
    > almost never used correctly.
    >
    > The basic rule for JavaScript on Web 1.0 pages is that it should never
    > be necessary. use it for rollovers, decoration, gimmickery etc. but
    > lay off using it for the core function. In these cases, you don't need
    > to dupe it into <noscript> at all.
    >
    > There are very few cases where JavaScript can be replaced by
    > <noscript>. If you're using client-side JavaScript to generate
    > content, then it's usually simply better to do this server-side
    > anyway. You might (in WCAG world) have to do just this to populate the
    > <noscript> that you'd be better off avoiding the need for altogether.
    >
    > Web 2.0 is different. If you're AJAXing your content into place with
    > asynch loads, then there's just no way to replace that with any sort
    > of static notice in a <noscript>. The fix here is to fall back to a
    > Web 1.0 implementation instead, with lots of <form>s, page submissions
    > and round-tripping the whole page back to the server. This gets
    > really messy to try and cover both patterns on a single page, so
    > you're often better doing it as two separates.

    Well yes, I think that is the type of thing I was thinking of,
    personally I would just do the lot server side, considering the
    availibility of band width now a days it's really not a big deal to
    just let the server deal with processing form data etc.

    >
    > There's never a need to make any _page_ accessible -- it's always an
    > alternative to offer an accessible page _in_addition_. Although good
    > CSS techniques make this costly process unneccessary for general
    > design work, it can be a reasonable approach when you're doing AJAX
    > and similar work.
    >

    That makes a lot of sence realy. It's all the more reason for useing
    server side technology instead of doing thing client side and needing
    too then code stuff on the server anyway just in case.

    > If you're going this deeply into things, you really need to be using
    > an MVC pattern too. You'll maybe build it without, but you wouldn't
    > want to maintain it afterwards.

    I had too google some of what you ment in that previous sentence but I
    think I get the idea.
    --
    Regards Chad. http://freewebdesign.awardspace.biz
    Chaddy2222, Jun 28, 2007
    #11
  12. Chaddy2222

    Nick Kew Guest

    Re: Web Accessibility Checklist was Re: Please review my site

    On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 23:13:51 +0100
    Andy Dingley <> wrote:

    > On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 00:30:04 -0700, Chaddy2222
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > >> You should also
    > >> read,http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/full-checklist.html web
    > >> accessibility is now law in the UK as well as other countries.

    >
    > I've just noticed that the WCAG Samurai (which includes Joe Clark)
    > have recently published their errata to the WCAG guidelines
    > http://wcagsamurai.org/


    It's a shame they show such deep tunnel-vision, and make leaps
    of illogic from "XYZ is often abused" (or even "XYZ might be
    suboptimal", in the case of serverside imagemaps) to "XYZ is banned".


    --
    Nick Kew

    Application Development with Apache - the Apache Modules Book
    http://www.apachetutor.org/
    Nick Kew, Jun 28, 2007
    #12
  13. Chaddy2222

    Chris Morris Guest

    Re: Web Accessibility Checklist was Re: Please review my site

    Nick Kew <> writes:
    > On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 23:13:51 +0100
    > Andy Dingley <> wrote:
    > > I've just noticed that the WCAG Samurai (which includes Joe Clark)
    > > have recently published their errata to the WCAG guidelines
    > > http://wcagsamurai.org/

    >
    > It's a shame they show such deep tunnel-vision, and make leaps
    > of illogic from "XYZ is often abused" (or even "XYZ might be
    > suboptimal", in the case of serverside imagemaps) to "XYZ is banned".


    "Ignore all references to ¡Ènon-visual displays¡É or ¡Èmonochrome
    displays.¡É Web accessibility is about people with disabilities, not
    their equipment. A ¡Èdisplay¡É is not a person and does not need
    accessibility."

    This seems to me to be a *very* narrow view to take, too. To me,
    device-independence of content is an important part of web
    accessibility even if the goal is solely about people, and even if the
    goal is solely about people, it should be about accommodating people's
    specific requirements, and those requirements may not be ones
    recognised as disabilities.

    Example 1: I currently use Firefox and Lynx as my most common two
    browsers. If I were to suffer from a motor disability that prevented
    me from using a mouse effectively, I'd drop Firefox and keep
    Lynx. Despite my vision remaining good, I still benefit very strongly
    from good practice with colours in this case, solely because of the
    display technology I would use.

    Example 2: When I'm coding, I find (and I freely admit this is
    probably very unusual) I'm much more efficient using lots of text
    consoles and using Alt-n to switch between them, than I am with a
    windowed environment (and especially not with the slow switching
    between X and console). I therefore use text browsers rather a lot
    when coding. I agree, the display is not me, but that doesn't mean
    that I don't benefit considerably from sites that are accessible on
    that display.

    Example 3: If I only have a monochrome printer, and find it easier to
    read pages printed (and perhaps expanded) than on screen.

    Now, as it happens, in the specific case of colours, if you design it
    so that it works for people with the particular disabilities
    mentioned, it also works fine for people with different display
    technology, so it's not a major problem. On the other hand, it seems
    to be a worrying principle to set out.


    Also, in their (correct) removal of most of the Priority 3 guidelines,
    they seem to have liked the simplicity of getting rid of all of them
    (to the level of MUST NOT) over making sense. For example: "13.9
    Provide information about document collections..." is now marked with
    a terse "Ignore" despite it being a generally good idea if you happen
    to have document collections. Given that they say you must not comply
    or attempt to comply with any Priority 3 guideline, this means that if
    you do have a document collection, you must go out of your way to
    avoid giving information about it, or fail to meet WCAG1+S

    "13.6 Group related links ..." is ignored on the grounds that "Not all
    sites or pages have related links" (which seems an incredible
    non-sequitur: not all pages have non-text content, so should 1.1 also
    be ignored?) and "[no element with relevant semantics]" (which I'd
    have thought <ul> made a reasonable go at in many cases)

    Similarly, 9.4's errata "Do not attempt to create your own tab order"
    seems to be based on a misunderstanding (albeit a very common one) of
    what 9.4 "Create a logical tab order..." meant in the first place. The
    common interpretation seems to be 'tabindex', but it could just as
    easily refer to placing the elements into the document in an order
    that gave a sensible tab order without the need for tabindex -
    something that remains fairly important.


    I'd also have liked to see some attempt to address the box ticking
    nature of "compliance with WCAG1.0" rather than just replacing some of
    the boxes.

    --
    Chris
    Chris Morris, Jun 28, 2007
    #13
  14. Re: Web Accessibility Checklist was Re: Please review my site

    Scripsit Andy Dingley:

    > I've just noticed that the WCAG Samurai (which includes Joe Clark)
    > have recently published their errata to the WCAG guidelines
    > http://wcagsamurai.org/


    Initially, I had high expectations, but I found no other author name but Joe
    Clark, and that's ominous: an anonymous group issuing something that
    purports to be authoritative. The word "errata" is frightening, too: that
    word has long been abused by the W3C as a pseudo-term for sloppily written
    documents that have an undefined status.

    So I tuned down my expectations and wasn't really surprised at seeing very
    wrong moves like banning all layout tables.

    --
    Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
    Jukka K. Korpela, Jul 4, 2007
    #14
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Replies:
    5
    Views:
    413
    Neredbojias
    Jul 27, 2005
  2. sorry.no.email@post_NG.com

    Site Review

    sorry.no.email@post_NG.com, Apr 17, 2006, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    679
    Nije Nego
    Apr 19, 2006
  3. KK
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    522
    Big Brian
    Oct 14, 2003
  4. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    298
  5. www
    Replies:
    51
    Views:
    1,451
Loading...

Share This Page