On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Sébastien Hinderer <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:Sebastien.Hinderer@snv.jussieu.fr">Sebastien.Hinderer@snv.jussieu.fr</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">> Joe Atzberger wrote:<br>
><br>
> >This depends entirely on the "assistive technology" that you care about. If<br>
> >you mean something ancient, like JAWS 2.0 then it is easy to say that no<br>
> >modern website is compliant.<br>
<br>
</div>As far as I undrstand it, accessibility does _not_ depend on which assistive technology is used.<br>
</blockquote></div><br>Abstractly yes, but the question was specifically 508-compliance. As a practical matter that depends on what assistive technology is the benchmark for sections 1194.22 l and n. The spec takes a very broad definition for assistive technology, namely:<br>
<br><blockquote style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;" class="gmail_quote">Any item, piece of equipment, or system, whether acquired commercially,
modified, or customized, that is commonly used to increase, maintain,
or improve functional capabilities of individuals with disabilities</blockquote><div><br>So it really isn't possible to test against that level of abstraction and declare one's code compliant. Certainly not with anything like the concreteness found in the HTML or XHTML specs. <br>
<br>Having worked with (broadcast) radio reading services back in the 90's, I am familiar with the older generations of screenreaders, but Sébastien perhaps you can tell us what software is "commonly used" today?<br clear="all">
<br>Regarding javascript, I don't think that is a dealbreaker per se. For example, our use of YUI to make drop-down buttons out of lists or links should be compliant. <br>-- <br>Joe Atzberger<br>LibLime - Open Source Library Solutions<br>
</div>