[thelist] Color Chooser Review -- correction

[Tom Dell'Aringa]

I'm amazed at how much name-calling has gone on just because somebody doesn't agree with a
person's point of view. I'm lazy, I'm a bad programmer, I take short-cuts, I'm some kind of
fascist. Just because some people surf using the dotted lines, doesn't mean everyone else does.
One person likes the lines because they use them to surf, another doesn't because s/he doesn't use
them and it distracts them. Who is right? NOBODY. It's preference. Last time I checked there was
no instruction manual on "How to correctly surf the Internet, by so and so huff and stuff."

I already pointed out the fact that I ended up using the <label> tag after all. But to even label
the <label> (heh heh) tag "future-proof" is itself a joke. NOTHING is future-proof.

Lastly, even though Martin brags about his ability to walk into an office and in 5-10 minutes have
them licking his boots and begging him to let them write "accessible" code, it simply doesn't
happen very often. As for companies "secretly" writing accessible code -- if its a secret how do
you know about it? You don't, you're making it up to try and validate your opinion.

Show me one case where a closed, proprietary intranet system was successfully sued for
non-comliance to one of the silly laws you keep quoting. You won't, because it doesn't exist. The
next thing you know, you'll be trying to sue the Indianapolis speedway because they don't allow
blind drivers to race in the Indy 500.

/tom


--- aardvark <roselli at earthlink.net> wrote:
> > From: GregHolmes at aol.com
> >
> > > There's a real tendency, especially
> > > on a list like this, to hold on to high ideals like browser
> > > accessability,
> > > but in the business world of dollars, things aren't so rosy.
> >
> > But, I think the original issue was whether or not to use the
> > label tag?  And whether to override or change its default
> > functionality (dotted outline upon selecting)?
>
> and that is a situation where the business case being argued is a
> veil for developer short-cuts and assumed user preference....
>
> as you said in the part i snipped, a <label> is future-proof... when
> the only excuse for not using it is because the developer doesn't
> like the dotted lines, then it's not a business case being made at
> all, and even accessibility doesn't apply... it's about making
> assumptions on behalf of your users and ignoring better solutions
> as a result...
>
> as a non-handicapped-in-any-way user, i rely *heavily* on the
> dotted lines in IE... i surf with at least a dozen windows, and cycle
> them regularly... those dotted lines tell me where i left off when
> surfing my logs, a list of links, or even a gallery of images...
>
> if a developer tried to disable those dotted lines, i'd disable JS
> (assuming the developer was using blur to hide them), and that
> developer could stick the rest of the JS on the site elsewhere...
>
> i didn't weigh in on that part of the discussion because of some
> posturing...
>
> but in short:
>
> - there are exceptions to accessibility, but if you read existing law,
> it's usually a *very* specific exception, and *rarely* affects
> software applications (web or otherwise)...
>
> - those exceptions should be treated as exceptions, not as veils to
> gee-whiz or lazy coding practices...
>
>
> --
> Read the evolt.org case study
> Usability: The Site Speaks for Itself
> http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1904151035/evoltorg
> ISBN: 1904151035
> --
> For unsubscribe and other options, including
> the Tip Harvester and archive of thelist go to:
> http://lists.evolt.org Workers of the Web, evolt !


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com