Comments on: Web 2 Oh Too Much http://jungshadow.com/blog/2006/10/05/web-2-oh-too-much/ The Gateless Barrier Sat, 24 Dec 2011 14:10:45 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: jared http://jungshadow.com/blog/2006/10/05/web-2-oh-too-much/comment-page-1/#comment-5 jared Fri, 06 Oct 2006 19:55:30 +0000 http://www.jungshadow.com/blog/2006/10/05/web-2-oh-too-much/#comment-5 Maybe Ted <em>is</em> Tad. Maybe Ted is Tad.

]]> By: jared http://jungshadow.com/blog/2006/10/05/web-2-oh-too-much/comment-page-1/#comment-4 jared Fri, 06 Oct 2006 19:53:26 +0000 http://www.jungshadow.com/blog/2006/10/05/web-2-oh-too-much/#comment-4 I think there are tremendous gains in using the Ajax methods in web design, even accessibility gains by doing so. However, I'm inclined to agree with some of the more vocal opponents that we shouldn't rush into this because many businesses would weigh slick functionality over accessibility. Why do something "accessible" when you can do something "cool?" That argument plays in my head probably about the same amount it would play in a customer's head: "OK . . . my web designer is capable of XHTML/CSS standards compliant coding, but he can do some major flashy Web 2.0 stuff, too. What's going to 'WOW' the majority of my clients more?" I don't think there's anything malicious about it. It's just a very business-driven mentality. I'm glad the web is expanding and experimenting, but we shouldn't leave anyone behind. I think there are tremendous gains in using the Ajax methods in web design, even accessibility gains by doing so. However, I’m inclined to agree with some of the more vocal opponents that we shouldn’t rush into this because many businesses would weigh slick functionality over accessibility. Why do something “accessible” when you can do something “cool?” That argument plays in my head probably about the same amount it would play in a customer’s head: “OK . . . my web designer is capable of XHTML/CSS standards compliant coding, but he can do some major flashy Web 2.0 stuff, too. What’s going to ‘WOW’ the majority of my clients more?”

I don’t think there’s anything malicious about it. It’s just a very business-driven mentality. I’m glad the web is expanding and experimenting, but we shouldn’t leave anyone behind.

]]> By: Irving http://jungshadow.com/blog/2006/10/05/web-2-oh-too-much/comment-page-1/#comment-3 Irving Fri, 06 Oct 2006 13:58:09 +0000 http://www.jungshadow.com/blog/2006/10/05/web-2-oh-too-much/#comment-3 The author is actually <em>Tad</em> Williams, not Ted. Sorry baseball fans, I don't think Ted was writing a futuristic novel on virtual reality while maintaining his .400 batting average in 1941. The author is actually Tad Williams, not Ted. Sorry baseball fans, I don’t think Ted was writing a futuristic novel on virtual reality while maintaining his .400 batting average in 1941.

]]> By: Irving http://jungshadow.com/blog/2006/10/05/web-2-oh-too-much/comment-page-1/#comment-2 Irving Fri, 06 Oct 2006 12:47:09 +0000 http://www.jungshadow.com/blog/2006/10/05/web-2-oh-too-much/#comment-2 Good post. I hadn't really considered the accessibility issues until now. I think we should always be striving to improve our applications and technology (thank God we're not still using Windows 95), and I'm all for Web 2.0. We all love Google Maps don't we? I think there are a lot of benefits to be had in 2.0 and not all of it is just frivolous tricks. That being said, I agree with many of the points you raise. There are a lot of sites that use AJAX for the sake of using AJAX. It doesn't always make for a better experience, and it's a huge problem for screen readers. The problem is I don't think this is going away and more and more web sites are going to start relying heavily on some form of client-side scripting. I admit I know nothing about screen readers outside of what is implied by the name, but I think they should evolve along with the web. And we should force sighted users to get a browser that can handle javascript! And while we're at why not make them <a href="http://www.mozilla.com/firefox/" rel="nofollow">get Firefox</a>. Well, I could go on more about this, but this isn't my blog :-) We're all going to eventually "live" in the web à la Ted William's Otherworld series anyway and all this will be moot. Good post. I hadn’t really considered the accessibility issues until now.

I think we should always be striving to improve our applications and technology (thank God we’re not still using Windows 95), and I’m all for Web 2.0. We all love Google Maps don’t we? I think there are a lot of benefits to be had in 2.0 and not all of it is just frivolous tricks.

That being said, I agree with many of the points you raise. There are a lot of sites that use AJAX for the sake of using AJAX. It doesn’t always make for a better experience, and it’s a huge problem for screen readers.

The problem is I don’t think this is going away and more and more web sites are going to start relying heavily on some form of client-side scripting. I admit I know nothing about screen readers outside of what is implied by the name, but I think they should evolve along with the web. And we should force sighted users to get a browser that can handle javascript! And while we’re at why not make them get Firefox.

Well, I could go on more about this, but this isn’t my blog :-) We’re all going to eventually “live” in the web à la Ted William’s Otherworld series anyway and all this will be moot.

]]>