Is OnClick safe?
Home / Site Building & Testing / Is OnClick safe?
OK, don't shoot me, here. I've just read the article:
http://www.alistapart.com/...
It has a note that says:
| Quote: |
| A note for accessibility aficionados
Our events will not trigger exclusively for mouse users despite the fact that we’re only capturing “onclick”. “Onclick” is triggered by all forms of activation (e.g. pressing enter) on all popular browsers. (It works pretty much the same way as Mozilla’s XUL’s oncommand.) |
While this may be true, at least for now, It still makes me feel a little uneasy. does anyone have experiences where OnClick hasn't been accessible?
Share: 
If so, it's a buggy browser. "onclick" is really a misnomer; it should have been called "onactivate"._________________
Tommy has left the building
Share:
Thanks for that Tommy, I've never come across an instance where it hasn't worked, I just wonder whether there's some OS/User Agent/Adaptive technology issue.
I'm guessing that there's not.
Share:
| TOOLman wrote: |
| If so, it's a buggy browser. "onclick" is really a misnomer; it should have been called "onactivate". |
yup. i tried hammering this out on the w3c wai ig list a while ago http://lists.w3.org/...
_________________
Patrick H. Lauke / webmaster / University of Salford
co-lead: WaSP Accesibility Task Force
take it to the streets ... WaSP Street Team
personal: splintered | photographia | redux
co-author: Web Accessibility - Web Standards and Regulatory Compliance
Share:
Great minds think alike? 
_________________
Tommy has left the building
Share:
Wait!
I'm only half way through my testing, but I've discovered that:
If your using Jaws 3.0, with Netscape 2.0 then Onclick doesn't work at all if the page was written using fireworks 1.0, so I can confirm, without any doubt whatsoever that the OnClick event is not safe to use when viewed through a television using a Sky digibox, or on a Sinclair Spectrum.
I think I might have found that buggy browser Tommy
Next stop, Javascript Drop down menus viewed using an Atari 2600 and Gecko.
Share:
Most assistive technology doesn't support JavaScript (or any other client-side scripting), and I assume that's the case with JAWS. So it's not the 'onlick' that's the problem, it's scripting support in the first place. If so, it doesn't matter which event handler you use.
It could also be that Netscape 2.0 doesn't support your script, of course, in case JAWS relies on the underlying browser for script handling.
(I'm expecting a demo version of JAWS any day now, so I'll be able to test it myself. With pwWebSpeak, there's no doubt about it.)
_________________
Tommy has left the building
Share:
| TOOLman wrote: |
| Most assistive technology doesn't support JavaScript |
in my testing, most screenreaders do try (and mostly succeed) with javascript. keep in mind that pwWebSpeak is a nasty piece of crud. JAWS and co. hook into / sit on top of IE for web browsing...so anything IE can do, the screenreaders attempt as well.
_________________
Patrick H. Lauke / webmaster / University of Salford
co-lead: WaSP Accesibility Task Force
take it to the streets ... WaSP Street Team
personal: splintered | photographia | redux
co-author: Web Accessibility - Web Standards and Regulatory Compliance
Share:
| TOOLman wrote: |
| Most assistive technology doesn't support JavaScript (or any other client-side scripting), and I assume that's the case with JAWS. |
JAWS and WindowEyes, two of the most popular screen readers, support scripting just fine -- they run on top of the operating system. Usually the users are running Internet Explorer, and the screen reader just reads what is there. So, if the user has scripting on, then scripts run, no problem.
Other assistive technology like voice recognition software runs on top of the OS as well -- Dragon Naturally Speaking for example works on top of IE, again, with no impact on scripting whatsoever.
Where the issue arises is where certain scripts don't work well with screen readers -- as an example, showing and hiding divs. While the JavaScript will allow the div to show and hide, there is no feedback that tells the user that anything has changed in their display, and generally speaking, the screen reader doesn't react.
There have been times when I've been a bit surprised by what a screen reader has actually done in certain scenarios -- i.e., it reacted very well to the scripting. I'll see what I can do to narrow down the conditions to understand them a bit better...
cheers,
feather.
_________________
Derek Featherstone
simplyaccessible.com | furtherAhead.com | BoxofChocolates.ca
Share:
...again, great minds.... 
_________________
Patrick H. Lauke / webmaster / University of Salford
co-lead: WaSP Accesibility Task Force
take it to the streets ... WaSP Street Team
personal: splintered | photographia | redux
co-author: Web Accessibility - Web Standards and Regulatory Compliance
Share:
| redux wrote: |
| ...again, great minds.... |
... unreal ...
_________________
Derek Featherstone
simplyaccessible.com | furtherAhead.com | BoxofChocolates.ca
Share:
Tommy,
| Quote: |
| It could also be that Netscape 2.0 doesn't support your script, of course, in case JAWS relies on the underlying browser for script handling. |
I was only joking about the Netscape 2.0 thing, and the Atari 2600 thing.
Does anyone even know where I could find a copy of Netscape 2.0?
But what has been said, I believe is correct, a screenreader will depend heavily on how the browser displays things, so if you use a script and IE or whatever can support it, then the screenreader will read it. I don't think there's an exception to this, except maybe where Flash text alternatives can't be read on anything other than IE/Windows, but that's a slightly different scenario.
The problems would probably occur on the browser/OS side of things before the Screenreader could get to see it. I think this is what I was hoping to find out. It seems that all is well.
How do I go about joining your great minds club? sounds like a hoot.
I'm afraid that maybe I won't meet the minumum requirement though
Share:
| Grant Broome wrote: |
| How do I go about joining your great minds club? sounds like a hoot.
I'm afraid that maybe I won't meet the minumum requirement though |
Minimum requirements
- Love people
Sense of humour
Willingness at all times to contribute, even if it does provoke controversy
Take criticism on the cheek
Give as good as you get
and finally
Acknowledge that we all have the same intention, World Domination through web accessibility
look out Mr Gate$Welcome to the club
_________________
Mike Abbott
Accessible to everyone
Share:
| Grant Broome wrote: |
| a screenreader will depend heavily on how the browser displays things, so if you use a script and IE or whatever can support it, then the screenreader will read it. |
Not exactly -- screen readers have some issues with different JavaScripts -- it is completely dependent upon what is happening. One basic example is that JAWS, for instance, generally can't have any way of reading the contents of a div that was hidden, and then is shown using JavaScript. I say generally, because I can't rule out the possibility, but for the most part, it doesn't work based upon my testing with users.
cheers,
feather.
_________________
Derek Featherstone
simplyaccessible.com | furtherAhead.com | BoxofChocolates.ca
Share:
| Grant Broome wrote: |
| T
Does anyone even know where I could find a copy of Netscape 2.0? |
http://browsers.evolt.org/
keep in mind that some old browsers can't cope with HTTP 1.1. a solution to this is to set up the old browser to go through a proxy. see my posts on this thread here http://www.sitepoint.com/...
_________________
Patrick H. Lauke / webmaster / University of Salford
co-lead: WaSP Accesibility Task Force
take it to the streets ... WaSP Street Team
personal: splintered | photographia | redux
co-author: Web Accessibility - Web Standards and Regulatory Compliance
Share:
All times are GMT
You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum