RE: usability issues with JavaScript (fwd)

["Barrett, Don" <Don_Barrett@ed.gov>]

Good question.  Can we really tell folks they can't use Javascript,
especially when most Windows screen readers handle it okay.  At what point
can we say that Windows is accessible enough so that we can't demand that
pages be all character-based and work with Lynx or other character-only
browsers.  I am not taking sides, but merely raising the questions.  

For example, here at work, we all had to switch to MS Word.  If Word were
not pretty accessible, the blind folks could have possibly demanded as a
reasonable accommodation, to stay with Word Perfect 5.1 for DOS.  Because of
Word's usability, we had to be dragged kicking and screaming into Word.
Thoughts?




-----Original Message-----
From: jn@tommy.demon.co.uk [mailto:jn@tommy.demon.co.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2000 4:18 PM
To: uaccess-l@trace.wisc.edu
Cc: jn@tommy.demon.co.uk
Subject: usability issues with JavaScript (fwd)


Accessibility issue here?

Forwarded message follows:

>Date:         Wed, 26 Jan 2000 07:21:24 -0600
>Reply-To: Julie Jensen <Julie.Jensen@USAA.COM>
>Sender: "ACM SIGCHI WWW Human Factors (Open Discussion)" <CHI-WEB@ACM.ORG>
>From: Julie Jensen <Julie.Jensen@USAA.COM>
>Subject:      usability issues with JavaScript
>To: CHI-WEB@ACM.ORG

>Hi,
>
>Our company currently designs for both Java Script and Non-Java Script
>enabled browsers (for example, we have mouse-over definitions, but also
>provide that content in a static glossary page for users without
>JavaScript). We are considering changing our browswer accomodation from
>Netscape 3.x and IE 3x to Netscape and IE 4.x browswers, primarily because
>of the perceived benefits of Java Script. (Incidentally, we have checked
our
>server logs and recognize that this will not cause much strife to our
target
>audience).
>
>I'd like to know the tradeoffs of JavaScript-ing (especially if we don't
>have a non-Java-Script version of that content). What are the associated
>risks and tradeoffs?  How is download speed effected? is it always an
>improvement to conduct calculations/error checking on the client side? any
>potential usability issues? Are there any warning signals that I should be
>detecting now?  We plan to build our usage guidelines for JavaScript (based
>on which scripts/functionality test successfully), but I'm wondering what
>usability issues may exist.
>
>If you could please forward your ideas, concerns, and nightmares to me, I'd
>be glad to summarize them for everyone.  Thanks,
>
>Julie
>
>/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
>Julie Jensen
>Julie.Jensen@USAA.Com
>Usability Specialist
>The views expressed in this e-mail are mine,
>all mine, and are not necessarily USAA's.
>/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\

Cheers from Chiswick,

John
-- 
Access the word, access the world       Tel/fax +44 20 8742 3170/8715
John Nissen                             Email to jn@tommy.demon.co.uk
Cloudworld Ltd., Chiswick, London, UK   http://www.tommy.demon.co.uk