Buzz Archives for February 2004
The benefits of Web Standards to your visitors, your clients, and you
Presentation to the Web Standards Group, Macromedia User Group and Cold Fusion User Group at MXDU2004: Day Zero. [ Via wg ]
By Meryl K. Evans | Filed in Web Standards (general)
- CSS Spec Updates
-
Word comes in from Tantek Çelik that the CSS Working Group has been busy. The past few days have seen the publication of the following goodies: CSS 2.1 Candidate Recommendation CSS Print Profile Candidate Recommendation CSS3 Hyperlink Presentation Module first working draft CSS ‘reader’ Media Type first working draft Of particular interest is the new ...
- XForms Validation
-
The XForms Institute announced the launch of its new Web service, currently in beta: Free Online XForms Validation. The site also hosts interactive XForms tutorials and content from the O'Reilly book, XForms Essentials authored by Micah Dubinko. The online service validates XForms documents by URL, file upload and text area input ...
By Holly Marie Koltz | Filed in Authoring Tools, Validation, Web Standards (general)
- IE Navigation Just Got Better
-
We've had the ability to add navigation options via the link element for accessibility purposes for some time now. But as with so much of what ails, user agent adoption has been slow in coming, especially for Internet Explorer. Users of Mozilla may already be familiar with the Site Navigation Bar, ...
By Molly E. Holzschlag | Filed in Accessibility, Browsers, Usability
- XHTML Modularization Take Two
-
Over at the W3C the good folks of the HTML Working Group have released a working draft of Modularization of XHTML 1.0 - Second Edition for community review. Interesting items in the draft include implementation of abstract modules using XML schemas and a number of corrections based on three ...
By Molly E. Holzschlag | Filed in HTML/XHTML
- Passing Validation Muster
-
Whew. We passed the XHTML validation test that Keith randomly conducted. He makes a few good points about how hard it is to stay valid. When validating a page, you fix the errors encountered. Who is to say tomorrow it will validate when you slip in your blog entry or ...
By Meryl K. Evans | Filed in Validation
- What is CC/PP and Why Should I Care?
-
CC/PP is not a new idea - it's been in development at the W3C for some time now. Yet, many web designers and developers are unaware of what it is, much less how it integrates with XML, XHTML and XSLT in an effort to improve device independence. The W3C ...
By Molly E. Holzschlag | Filed in WaSP Asks the W3C
- why you foxy browser, you
-
The Mozilla Foundation has released version 0.8 of Mozilla Firebird, but with a slick new name, “Firefox”. As the browser proceeds toward its much anticipated 1.0 version release, it continues to please many people with its clean lines, fast rendering, and of course - excellent commitment to web standards. Along with ...
By Molly E. Holzschlag | Filed in Browsers
- Sweet as chocolate, impenetrable as a Swiss bank vault
-
A recent study of Swiss administration and corporate sites says that out of 68 sites, only eight are fully accessible. In their detailed study, based on the WCAG 1.0 Guidelines, they found the usual stumbling blocks: Complex table layouts don't linearize Javascript navigation doesn't work without Javascript Form elements must be clearly labeled Non-scalable text ...
By Matthias Gutfeldt | Filed in Accessibility
- Accessible UK train timetable
-
Great Britain, while famous for many things, is perhaps best known for the efficiency and promptness with which it runs its rail systems. Each day millions of citizens are transported in comfort and style from the doorsteps of their homes, to offices, schools, shopping centres, and any number of other destinations. It's ...
By Dunstan Orchard | Filed in Accessibility
- Two DOM3 Modules Reach Proposed Recommendation Status
-
On Thursday the W3C released the DOM Level 3 Core and Load & Save modules as Proposed Recommendations. This is the final stop on the path to being a full-fledged W3C Recommendation. Both modules will be open for implementation feedback until March 5.
By Porter Glendinning | Filed in DOM, W3C/Standards Documentation
- Top businesses ignore accessibility
-
Businesses are missing a large audience by failing to make their Web sites accessible (news article no longer available). A Nomensa FTSE report finds that 79 percent of the Web sites did not provide alternate text for images, 56 percent did not have useful alternate text, and 77 percent did ...
By Meryl K. Evans | Filed in Accessibility
- Validator, heal thyself?
-
A long-standing bug in the W3C's CSS validator is receiving some high-profile attention: Jeffrey Zeldman, fellow WaSP Douglas Bowman, and web design magazine A List Apart discuss the validator's seeming unwillingness to parse Tantek Çelik's Box Model Hack, a popular and long-standing trick used to hide CSS from less ...
By Ethan Marcotte | Filed in CSS
- CSS: Beyond the Retrofit
-
Sure, you've heard the rumors. Heard the kids on the street talking about selectors, inheritance, and structured markup. Want to learn more, but not sure where to start? Well, have no fear — the inimitable Molly Holzschlag is here to help with CSS: Beyond the Retrofit. Taking us ...
By Ethan Marcotte | Filed in CSS
- Orkut no friend to the blind
-
Anders Jacobsen points out that Orkut, the latest in a seemingly endless string of social networking clones, fails the most basic accessibility requirement: ALT attributes on images. Specifically, the images that you select to accept or reject someone as your friend. So-and-so added you as a friend. Is So-and-so your friend? [LINK] ...
By Mark Pilgrim | Filed in Accessibility
The Web Standards Project is a grassroots coalition fighting for standards which ensure simple, affordable access to web technologies for all.
Recent Buzz
WCAG 2.0 is a W3C Recommendation
By Matt May | December 11th, 2008
After 9.5 years of work, the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 have reached W3C Recommendation status. On behalf of the WaSP Accessibility Task Force, I’d like to welcome WCAG 2 officially into the pantheon of Web standards.
I think this tweet by caledoniaman sums up the level of anticipation:
WCAG 2.0 and a new Guns ‘n’ Roses album in the same year. What’s the world coming to.
Interesting comparison. They’ve each had about as many pre-releases. In any case, I can say, having spent over 8 years with it, that WCAG 2 is not as entertaining as Chinese Democracy. But I do think that it’s better equipped to stand the test of time.
If I had to pick one thing I’m most happy about, I’d say it’s that the HTML- and text-centrism in WCAG 1 is largely gone. In its place is a much more flexible (dare I say robust?) concept of accessibility-supported technology. So when newer technologies can show themselves to be directly accessible, they too can be used in WCAG 2-conformant content.
Over the years, many people have conflated “WCAG-conformant” with “accessible,” and that’s led to people making statements like: “Don’t use JavaScript–it’s inaccessible.” That’s bad for everyone, from users with disabilities who actually can work with JavaScript (which is to say, the vast majority), to Web designers and developers, to policymakers, to those developing new technologies.
With WCAG 2, “Don’t use x” is no longer valid. (Was it ever?) It is now up to you, the developer, to work on the direct accessibility of your content, no matter what technology you choose. I believe we’re about to experience a new wave of accessible design techniques, as a result.
But first, we need to flush “Don’t use x” out of our system. Some are accustomed to saying it about anything they’re not comfortable with. That’s only holding accessible design back. It’s time to learn what’s out there, today, and use it in everyday Web design. It’s time to make everyone’s Web more accessible. Have a look at the WCAG 2.0 Recommendation, and its supporting material. Then, start thinking about what a more accessible Web could be. We still have a lot of work to do.
Filed in Accessibility, Accessibility TF, W3C/Standards Documentation, Web Standards (general) | Comments (8)