[thelist] RE: removing claret from IE (Here's how to do it)

[.jeff]

rob,

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> From: Rob Redford
>
> Accessibility be damned!
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

warm yourself and your clients up for litigation then.  accessibility isn't
just a nice thing to do, in many parts of the world it's the law.  the
further along we get in this journey, the more it will become a requirement.

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> If you insist on removing the dotted lines that appear
> around clicked links, form buttons, and image maps in
> IE it's easily done and does not affect how other
> browsers work with the same links.  Simply add this bit
> of Javascript to your anchor tags or form buttons:
>
> onFocus="if(this.blur)this.blur()"
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

aboslutely do *not* do it this way.  this is the most irresponsible way of
removing the outline.  if you *must* do it, do it in a fashion that will not
impact users using their keyboards.

here's some tests i put together that suggest that using the onmouseup event
is the least annoying/intrusive method:
http://members.evolt.org/jeff/code/link_accessibility_usability.cfm

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> Frankly, I don't see the what the BFD is about this --
> "accessibility" or otherwise.  I find the dotted lines
> to be intensely annoying (esp. on image maps),
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

fwiw, the outline isn't there for the designer.  it's there for the user.
last time i checked the user is more important.

i'm sorry to hear that it breaks your precious design.  i bet you'd love to
see what your site looks like in lynx.  ;p

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> and they aren't rendered in most browsers other than IE
> anyway, so that (IMHO) makes any argument for
> accessibility moot.
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

then maybe you need to do alittle more research.  if you would do so you'd
find that more vision impaired/disabled users use ie because of 2 things --
1) these accessibility enhancements other browsers do not yet contain and 2)
alot of the better screen readers work best with internet explorer, by far
the most common is jaws.  this takes the argument of accessibility from
"moot" as you say to what most with an ounce of reason would consider
paramount.

jaws
http://www.freedomscientific.com/

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> The claret is not a standard as such, although it is
> common to most Micro$oft products.
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

and that commonality to microsoft products (no, it's not spelled with a
dollar sign) means that its inclusion into the workings of the web browser
make that web browser infinitely more usable/accessible to people already
familiar with microsoft products.  usability and accessibility don't start
with the web browser, nor should they end with it.  it might pay to think
outside the web alittle more often as it's but a very small slice of
everyday computer use.

thanks,

.jeff

http://evolt.org/
jeff at members.evolt.org
http://members.evolt.org/jeff/