Quote:
Originally Posted by minutedesigns
Put a link to show WAI-AAA and then say in your FAQ "It probably isn't"
SO WHY POST IT AT ALL, OR AT LEAST POST IT ELSEWHERE FOOLISH PERSON! |
Maybe he can't change it now, because of all the Zen Garden designs that already incorporate it.
Quote:
|
Online checks do pickup on the "TABINDEX" and the "ACCESSKEYS" actually..
|
Yes, but
incorrectly so.
The automated checks insist that you specify accesskeys and tabindex for everything, which is not a requirement of
WCAG.
Quote:
|
WAI-AAA yet dosnt look boring like a screenreader site!
|
You've followed the automated guidelines moronically. You even have accesskeys for your validation links.
Why? Because Cynthia said so? Cynthia
is a robot. Use your brain!
You should never use accesskeys. I know the lauded
WCAG say otherwise, but they're wrong. Access keys harm accessibility by overriding familiar browser shortcuts. The only safe way to use accesskeys is to disable them by default and allow users the option of activating them. While you're at it, you can allow users to
choose their accesskeys (here's
an example I made; uses javascript).
But have you even
read the
WCAG? Here's what they say about accesskeys:
Quote:
|
Provide keyboard shortcuts to important links (including those in client-side image maps), form controls, and groups of form controls.
|
Important links. Your validation badges are not important links; indeed, I don't think they even deserve to exist, let alone be dignified with an accesskey.
And here's what they say about the tabindex:
Quote:
|
Create a logical tab order through links, form controls, and objects. For example, in HTML, specify tab order via the "tabindex" attribute or ensure a logical page design.
|
Did you read that last part?
Or ensure a logical page design. There's no need to go putting
tabindex on everything if your source order is logical.
Before you go bragging about
WCAG AAA, and condemning others for not "passing" it, make sure you've
actually read the guidelines.
Quote:
|
Correct, however if its valid show the mark, if its not its not
|
You seem to think that accessibility can be validated.
It can't. Accessibility requires thought, not just a syntax checker. Syntax has little to do with accessibility.