Buzz Archives for November 2004
Netscape FirIE?
According to Slashdot, AOL has started beta testing their new Firefox-based version of Netscape, and it contains a little surprise: the new browser allows you to choose between Gecko and Trident, the rendering engines used in Firefox and IE, respectively. As usual, I'm ambivalent. The geek in me says 'cool'. The ...
By Chris Kaminski | Filed in Browsers
- Web Breakage
-
A quick clarification on Molly's otherwise excellent post on Microsoft's fear of updating IE: Mr. Schare doesn't preclude improvements to IE's standards support altogether. Indeed, neither Molly nor Tristan say otherwise — though my slow brain did get that impression at first. The truth is, Mr. Schare says quite the ...
By Chris Kaminski | Filed in Browsers
- breaking the web
-
Is Microsoft breaking the web by not updating the IE browser or planning better standards support in any yet-to-appear OS-based browser? In his article How Microsoft can support CSS2 without breaking the Web Tristan Nitot, who was with the Netscape Evangelism team before its demise, points to an interview in which ...
By Molly E. Holzschlag | Filed in Browsers
- QuirksMode Bug Reports
-
This is very useful: QuirksMode Bug Reports, "entirely dedicated to finding, mending, and publishing CSS and JavaScript browser bugs." You can search by browser or by keyword, or just go to that page to see the last seven reported bugs.
By Dori Smith | Filed in General
- Browsers, Browsers Everywhere
-
C|net has a full plate of browser news today, including confirmation of a new Firefox-based release of Netscape and the obligatory litany of IE security flaws (The Register has more). They've also got a speculative bit on the possibility that Microsoft may update IE via IE's add-on mechanism, and a ...
By Chris Kaminski | Filed in Browsers
- It’s baaa-aack! (again)
-
BetaNews reports that AOL has re-started browser development and will be releasing a new version of Netscape based on Firefox. Users interested in participating in the beta program for he new Netscape can go here and, after entering your AOL/Netscape screen name (or getting one) sign on with registration code prototype1104.
By Chris Kaminski | Filed in Browsers
- beautiful browser
-
Beautiful browser, wake unto me, Standards based web sites are waiting for thee; I struggle with rude browsers throughout the day, But lulled by your strength the others will pass away! Beautiful browser, Fox of my song, List while I woo thee with my code and my word; Gone shall be the woes of the IE-only ...
By Molly E. Holzschlag | Filed in Browsers
- What can we talk about now?
-
In his post What can we talk about now?, Andy Clarke notes how far we've come and ponders how much further we can go with web standards. So is this it? Have we pushed the current crop of browsers as far as they can go? Is Internet Explorer going to hold ...
By Drew McLellan | Filed in Web Standards (general)
- oh that elitist smell
-
A great many discussions have taken place regarding the sense of elitism in the creation, implementation, and study of web standards. Here's what I've been thinking about that elitist smell that surrounds us, where it comes from, and how we can freshen the air. W3C The W3C often comes across as an ...
By Molly E. Holzschlag | Filed in Web Standards (general)
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)