On Tuesday, 10 May 2011 at 15:41, tedd wrote: At 3:53 PM -0700 5/9/11, Micky Hulse wrote: > > On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 2:56 PM, tedd <tedd.sperling@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Really? > > > How does the blind via readers, such as JAWS, understand what a <B> is? > > > First, never use <B> -- or <I> for that matter. > > > Second, use <strong> or <em> instead. Readers can understand and render > > > STRONG and EMPHASIZED text, but not <B> and <I> text -- those tags mean > > > nothing and that's the reason why they are not encouraged for use and even > > > removed from XHTML. > > > Third, if neither of those tags (i.e., <strong> or <em> ) work for you, they > > > try using a class (or an id) with a css rule of: > > > > [OT] > > > > Tedd, it seems like you are spreading a little bit of mis-information here. > > Micky: > > I see that you brought your authority to the argument, namely: > > http://html5doctor.com/i-b-em-strong-element/ > > So, allow me to bring mine -- my information/position stems from my > understanding derived from both daily practice and constant reading. > In addition to reading links like the above (which I read btw), I > also read several list provided by disability concerns, such as > "webdev.lists.d.umn.edu" being the best. In addition to all that, I > also read several technical books each week re these subjects. > > For example, within this last month I've purchased and read HTML5 by > Lawson, Smashing CSS by Meyer, 100 Things by Weinschenk, Learning Web > Design by Robbins, Designing with the Mind in Mind by Johnson, Forms > that work by Jarret, Build your own web site the right way by Lloyd, > PHP 5.3 by Doyle, and Expert PHP and MySQL by Cuniosoa. That's a lot > of reading, -- so I think I keep up with what's going on. > > While it is true that html5 brought back tags such as <b> and <i>, > but it has also brought back <table> for presentation. I leave the > reader (and the future) to judge the wisdom of that decision. > > I think we all realize the problems that these tags bring to the > table (no pun intended). We can either continue to resolve the > problems they present or we can resort back to the way things were. > > As for me, I choose to never use <b> and <i> for anything PERIOD and > to speak out against their use whenever I can. As for <table> in > presentation, I am still undecided. While I would never use tables > for the presentation of text, I often use simple tables (i.e., no > nesting) for holding forms together. However, I am leaning toward not > using tables for that either. > > The world is changing and I don't think any organization can dictate > what is the right/wrong way to do anything. But the good thing here > is that we are left to our own judgement as to what we support and > what we condemn. In my judgment, the <b> and <i> tags present more > problems than they solve so I will continue to not use those tags and > speak against them. While I don't necessarily disagree with your point about HTML5 bringing back prehistoric tags, I do think it's important to remember that the fundamental reason for having the spec is that everyone (developers, browsers, screenreaders, etc) are working from the same guidelines. You have to assume that HTML5 consumption devices (both software and hardware) will follow the spec, so as a developer I think it's important to do the same regardless of your philosophical arguments against the decisions made when that spec was written. -Stuart -- Stuart Dallas 3ft9 Ltd http://3ft9.com/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
