But it’s as pointless banning all javascript for no good reason as it is allowing javascript that discriminates against users. I don’t have access to the tech myself, but it is a set of tests that needs doing.

And regarding the whole “proposed public sector web guidelines”, I think we’re more waiting to see what the COI comes back with (of which more later)…

Jack, can I raise C4 again… Do you know of a definitive list of AT that postback (and other javascript) works with (or that it doesn’t work with!)? Unless that is available then C4 cannot realistically have the ‘OR’ clause.

J

Jack

an ambitious and worthy project and sure to create discussion. here’s my initial tuppence :

1) no mention of the validity of code (wcag1 3.2) I always thought this was perhaps *the* most important checkpoint of them all. If code doesn’t validate to specified dtd how can we be sure that it will work as intended ->should be critical.

2) no mention of table summaries. (Desirable?)

3)no mention of how to handle frames (maybe add to I

4) re I 11: how exactly would you allow a form submission to be reversed? I’m not being intentionally antagonistic, I really don’t know.

5) re D12: should this be justified per se or right-aligned (both are poor practice [unless of course you happen to be writing in a R to L language!])

Julian

I have signed up for the forum, but don’t have posting rights yet. So, I’m posting this here now, but will copy over once I have been approved. Hope that’s OK.

I have a few comments for your consideration… all references to Cx Ix and Dx are your guidelines/checkpoints and WCAG-x are for WCAG 1.0 x checkpoint.

C2 – not sure about the wording; to me it implies that I have to create a black and white version of the site if I use colours. What I think you mean is that users should be able to apply there own CSS colour scheme (although this would not work for images, so not sure whether the are included in this cp or not).

C3 – (as appropriate in the output code)?

C4 – I assume that this is derived from WCAG-6.2 However, I don’t know whether this adequately covers the problem of AJAX replacing/inserting new content into the existing page and how that works with screen readers. What spec of assistive tech? some screen-reader version implementation is really bad, I understand. Also, would a screen-reader user (especially of one of those that doesn’t play nicely with scripting) have it disabled by default and therefore may not get the functionality the developer is expecting ‘because it works’ anyway?

C5 – warnings no longer adequate? I would demote this to Important and/or keep with warnings in Critical

C6 – I need more explanation on this – does it mean lots of links ‘more…’ are OK as each is identifiable when with the context of the preceding text? If so, I’m not sure I agree – I thought one of the common screen-reader features used was the list of links read out. See D7 comment.

C8 – This implies that images of text is acceptable even though it wouldn’t be resizeable… I think more guidance/caveat along the lines of ‘if you really have to…’ is needed for images of text.

C11/12/13 – I’m sure these can be combined. The caveat from C13 surely applies to C11 too?

I6 – I would strengthen this to say that audio content is not auto-started.

I12 – should this be at the top of the page or in context of the input?

I15 – should this be broadened to all proprietary content? This implies MS Word/Excel/Visio files are all fine and dandy

D7 – I personally think this should be Important, if not Critical (see C6 comment).

D12 – or both justified? Although if right to left reading language this needs to be reversed.

You haven’t covered image-maps explicitly – are you assuming coverage by C14, etc. If so, then I would cite as an example.

Auto-refresh (as in WCAG-7.4) is not covered as far as I can see. I think it should be Critical.

I think it would be useful to incorporate some more AJAX specific warnings, e.g. about not using ‘hidden’ property to not display content (ignored by assistive tech)

Everyone else…..

MORE FEEDBACK HERE PLEASE!!!!!

a) via psf (& newsletter etc) and
b) draw them to attention of the PSWMG list?

What thoughts do you have about how/where people contribute/add etc should they wish to?

Oh for a wiki of some sort for this one!