Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > HTML > It does not look good for Target. Web Accessibility news

Reply
Thread Tools

It does not look good for Target. Web Accessibility news

 
 
Jonathan N. Little
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-09-2007
SpaceGirl wrote:
> Jonathan N. Little wrote:
>> SpaceGirl wrote:


>>
>> 3) Relates to #2. The damn page is just like an image of a piece of
>> paper. That's the problem the web is not paper.

>
> Says who? You? So, you are forcing YOUR limited view of what you think
> the web should be on everyone else? I think finally we get to the heart
> of the issue.



Well aside of the numerous accessibility studies done about the web just
casual observance of people using the web will show you. On the web
people scroll up and down not sideways. Even novice web designers
recognize this as they desperately try to center their content. We get
numerous posts on this NG. They usually make the notorious 'Scroll of
Death' sites often found on GeoCities or Tripod.

The Web is not paper. Books are the size they are because for the font
size the printer chooses with comfortable margins produces lines with
the sweet-spot of 10 words per line. A newspaper is the maximum size
that the average person can spread their arms to turn the page. Because
the page is so wide with a newspaper the content is set in columns and
the words per line average is nearly halved that of books to aid legibly
with the poorer contrast and paper - printing quality. Design is
influenced by the medium. But with paper the printer, artist,
calligrapher has control of that canvas. The web designer does not. All
they can do is disenfranchise some of their audience. You do not know
whether or not your sites are viewed on 2.5 inch display of a cell
phone, 540 pixel abortion of WebTV on an old TV, squeeze under 700
pixels on an old 13 inch VGA monitor or many feet displayed on a wall
with a projector. Or maybe no canvas at all! The Web is not paper, pain
and simple. Paper has dimensions and the Web does not.

As an artist and with my graphical perspective with my first websites I
approached web design like paper. My approach has evolved as the Web as
evolved and as learned more about the Web from actually using it.

Being accessible and flexible in web design does not necessarily equate
to plain and boring. It does take creativity. Doing it in flash does
make it creative either. There also is no one answer for all sites. You
can try to control all aspects of the presentation of a site, but it
comes at a price. The more your control the more you will limit
accessibility.

I am not against flash, any more than images or other media (well maybe
background music!!!!). All have their place. What I am saying is that
flash, at least at this state, is not a replacement for html.

--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
dorayme
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-09-2007
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
Jerry Stuckle <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> dorayme wrote:
> > In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> > Jerry Stuckle <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >
> >>>> Quite frankly, I don't give a damn. I have challenged him ...
> >>>
> >>> Ah! Changing the subject!
> >>>
> >> Nope. Brining it back to the original subject, troll.

> >
> > So, you are saying, it is a non-troll thing to do to go back to
> > an earlier subject when a person does not want to pursue a
> > particular side thread of a thread but that one who does want to
> > pursue a side thread and stay on it is a troll? Methinks this
> > troll attribution is a murky quantity <g>
> >

>
> I'm saying that when trolls are pinned down, they try to change the
> subject and otherwise deflect the conversation.
>
> Trolls are also good at misquoting and taking out of context.
>
> This describes you perfectly, troll.


I don't think so because I have not misquoted you, every side
issue can be unfairly cast as taking something out of context,
and it is you rather than me who keeps wanting to go back to the
original context. You were the one that accused Travis of being a
troll. Now I object to this strongly. I took you up on this
business, we were having a discussion about your conception of
trolling and I was interested in seeing if you had deeply
considered the matter, distinguishing trolling from other things,
good and bad. But you are showing signs of impatience and being
content to throw names about.

Now, about the *original* context (no, I am not changing the
subject), what was that? This thread is a big party with lots of
independent conversations going on.

--
dorayme
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Chris F.A. Johnson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-09-2007
On 2007-10-09, SpaceGirl wrote:
> Ben C wrote:
>>> Despite its nostaglic exigency, html/css does seem very much like a
>>> dead end in the future - especially with the browser-barons' lack of
>>> concordance.

>>
>> No, this is nonsense, and SpaceGirl's interpretation of history is also
>> a bit suspect.

>
> Nah I'm quite aware of the history, Microsoft of course did abuse their
> position, but OS software didn't really help either.


Can you provide an example of OS software that "didn't help"??


--
Chris F.A. Johnson <http://cfaj.freeshell.org>
================================================== =================
Author:
Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)
 
Reply With Quote
 
Travis Newbury
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-10-2007
On Oct 9, 5:01 pm, "Jonathan N. Little" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> I am not against flash, any more than images or other media (well maybe
> background music!!!!). All have their place. What I am saying is that
> flash, at least at this state, is not a replacement for html.


No, it isn't. But does that mean that we should be regulated on where
and how we use it?

 
Reply With Quote
 
Jonathan N. Little
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-10-2007
Travis Newbury wrote:
> On Oct 9, 5:01 pm, "Jonathan N. Little" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> I am not against flash, any more than images or other media (well maybe
>> background music!!!!). All have their place. What I am saying is that
>> flash, at least at this state, is not a replacement for html.

>
> No, it isn't. But does that mean that we should be regulated on where
> and how we use it?
>

The gods wont strike your down if your make an all flash site where html
would be more appropriate, but your may pay a price...

--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
Travis Newbury
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-10-2007
On Oct 9, 3:08 pm, Karl Groves <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Accessible for who?
> First, I've yet to see accessible flash.
> AT support for Flash is terribly spotty, so the amount of work required to
> make accessible Flash is bigger than most Flash developers want to deal
> with.


It is not that it is too much effort to make it accessible, but rather
Flash developers either don't know about accessibility, or they don't
care. It is easy enough to meet all the US government standards.
(Adobe has a plethora of white papers and documentation about this)

 
Reply With Quote
 
Travis Newbury
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-10-2007
On Oct 9, 9:02 pm, "Jonathan N. Little" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> > No, it isn't. But does that mean that we should be regulated on where
> > and how we use it?

> The gods wont strike your down if your make an all flash site where html
> would be more appropriate, but your may pay a price...


Why is it always an "all flash" site? I do not think you can find a
flash lover in this group that says an all flash site is a good thing,
present company included

 
Reply With Quote
 
Travis Newbury
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-10-2007
On Oct 9, 9:02 pm, "Jonathan N. Little" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Take care,


Just a side note.... Based on our conversations in this thread, and
when we made them. I believe you and I need to get a life....


 
Reply With Quote
 
Blinky the Shark
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-10-2007
Jonathan N. Little wrote:
> Travis Newbury wrote:
>> On Oct 9, 5:01 pm, "Jonathan N. Little" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>> I am not against flash, any more than images or other media (well maybe
>>> background music!!!!). All have their place. What I am saying is that
>>> flash, at least at this state, is not a replacement for html.

>>
>> No, it isn't. But does that mean that we should be regulated on where
>> and how we use it?
>>

> The gods wont strike your down if your make an all flash site where html
> would be more appropriate, but your may pay a price...


Like, for instance, people avoiding it?

--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project - http://improve-usenet.org
 
Reply With Quote
 
Jerry Stuckle
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-10-2007
Travis Newbury wrote:
> On Oct 9, 7:31 am, Jerry Stuckle <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> I'm saying that when trolls are pinned down, they try to change the
>> subject and otherwise deflect the conversation.

>
> And you seem to be afraid of the answer I may give if you actually ASK
> a question
>
>> Trolls are also good at misquoting and taking out of context.

>
> Then stop pussy footing around and just ask the question Jerry.
> Unless you are afraid of the answer. You seem to be evading asking
> the question you so often refer to. Ask it! I am begging you, for
> the love of God just ask your stupid question!
>


I have, Travis. But you just keep trying to change the subject. Go
back and read.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)
==================
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
treeview renders nothing, but does look good in design view? web.siteMap jobs ASP .Net 1 10-29-2007 08:34 PM
ASP.NET 2.0 web part accessibility question Jonathan Carter ASP .Net 0 12-03-2005 10:13 PM
Good accessibility? SamuŽl van Laere HTML 20 11-28-2004 11:31 AM
asp.net and Web Accessibility Standards Paul G ASP .Net 1 02-26-2004 10:26 PM



Advertisments