[TYPO3-hci] Kickoff: TYPO3 4.1 (suggestions)

[Kasper Skårhøj]

Hi Christopher,

Thanks for pointing out the accessibility issues. It seems like we  
could go at least parts of the way wihtout much fuss. Thats a start.

However, the critical point is if there are developers who are  
motivated to work on this. You have to find them first.

- kasper




On Sep 12, 2006, at 23:03 , Christopher wrote:

> Benjamin Mack wrote:
>> Hey,
>>
>> I agree with Dmitry. Accessibility is nice, but not necessary for  
>> TYPO3
>> admins. It is necessary for the frontend, that's for sure. But the  
>> TYPO3
>> Backend cannot work run without JavaScript (already), so Christophers
>> statement "fall back on existing page-refreshing ... when  
>> javascript is
>> not present" is not possible at all. So now, if we use javascript OR
>> javascript w/ AJAX activity shouldn't bother much. Also it is true  
>> that
>> this would be an aweful lot of work to do.
>>
>> So here would be my suggestion: Make the FE-editing accessible so
>> handicaped editors can work with the FE-mode. Would be way less work.
>>
>> The only thing I see with AJAX (has little to do with  
>> Accessibility) is
>> the "Back-Button" problem since a bunch of my clients / editors are
>> comfortable with it.
>>
>> greetings,
>> benni.
>> -SDG-
>>
>>
>> Dmitry Dulepov wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> Christopher wrote:
>>>> But in any case, even if we were to decide to ignore item 6.3
>>>> altogether, the core parts of the BE could probably be made to
>>>> comply, without much difficulty, with all of WCAG 1 and 2 and  
>>>> most of
>>>> 3--meeting as many guidelines as possible is definitely the
>>>> preferable course.
>>>
>>> Who exactly needs this? Typo3 is not easy to learn and I afraid it
>>> will be even harder for people with visual disabilities (if possible
>>> at all). They will not use typo3 BE anyway. Thus I do not think  
>>> it is
>>> worth spending time on developing "accessible" BE at all. It is the
>>> same as developing aircraft cabin accessible. So far no one did that
>>> and no one will do I think. It is simply not worth spending so much
>>> resources on it if one person of a million may be (!) will use it.
>>>
>>>> Plus, given that there is some interest in expanding TYPO3's  
>>>> userbase
>>>> into government and public institutions, accessibility will have to
>>>> be pursued at some point or other--and it'd be best to do it during
>>>> the 4.5-5.0 refactoring instead of rebuilding everything twice!
>>>
>>> Public institutions already use typo3: many universities, non-profit
>>> organizations, etc. They use due to features, not due to  
>>> accessibility.
>>>
>>> Typo3 output is accessible since meets w3c standards. As to BE,  
>>> it is
>>> for limited professionals only, nothing prevents any organization  
>>> from
>>> using it (if they can manage to learn it of course). US government
>>> uses non-accessible Boeing aircrafts with pleasure even though their
>>> "BE" (cabin) is totally not "accessible".
>
> I'm sorry Benni and Dmitry, but you're both wrong about this. In the
> first place, there are /many/ sorts of disabilities besides simple
> blindness, and a little bit of effort can go a /long/ way towards
> helping people with other sorts of access problems. In addition,
> creating leaner markup makes for faster page loads--I'd say TYPO3's BE
> is the slowest loading part of any CMS tool that I use on any kind of
> regular basis (the page tree frame alone, with only 20 pages  
> visible is
> 40k including javascript and even the markup alone is 28k!)--and as
> Elmar pointed out, lean code makes implementing Javascript and CSS
> changes quite easy.
>
> I'm not trying to be confrontational here, but did either of you
> actually /read/ about WCAG Level 1 or 2? Simply restricting the BE to
> valid HTML would accomplish /almost the entire Level 1 checklist/.
> Reducing the number of table-based forms (and/or improving the  
> existing
> ones) in the BE and building in sensible default CSS would achieve  
> most
> of the rest of 1 /and/ 2 and would be a very good start on 3.
>
> The BE already does reasonably well in some respects: it is  
> possible to
> use much of it at least without using a mouse or pointing device at  
> all,
> and as the existing skinning projects have shown, it is at least
> possible to change the look of most of it.
>
> I don't understand why it's so common for people to assume that  
> partial
> accessibility in web pages/applications is difficult to achieve.  
> Please,
> if you're going to disagree with the suggestion, try to do it in a  
> more
> informed way. What major, specific objections are there to any part of
> WCAG 1 or 2 besides item 6.3 which I've already mentioned?
>
> -Christopher
> _______________________________________________
> TYPO3-team-hci mailing list
> TYPO3-team-hci at lists.netfielders.de
> http://lists.netfielders.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/typo3-team-hci



- kasper

"Gimme Five!"
-------------------------------
kasper2006 at typo3.com | +45 20 999 115 | skype: kasperskaarhoej |  
gizmo: kasper_typo3