[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: lynx-dev Bad html documents

From: David Woolley
Subject: Re: lynx-dev Bad html documents
Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 09:33:10 +0100 (BST)

> enabled browser?  How would it act any different from just leaving the
> onclick part out altogether?  I've never understood the reasoning
> behind using Javascript for something that's already built into HTML.

There are always side effects.  It may be changing a banner in another
frame, or more likely it is launching the page into a window with no
toolbars to produce a "pop-up menu".  Even if the window is normal,
doing this with target will not force the window to the foreground if
it already exists.

As most people code HTML by copying others' bad practice, it is just
possible that someone has copied this technique and removed the side

Can I repeat what I said in another thread, such pages, if there is
no fallback, violate a priority one Web Contents Accessibility Guideline
and their legality in the USA (out of court settlements, including AOL)
and Australia (IBM/Olympics committee found guilty with respect to lack
of alt) is questionable, and they probably make the owner of the site
ineligible for public sector contracts under contract compliance rules.


; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to address@hidden

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]