Re: DB Maintenance Design Patterns

This is a strange discussion, we discuss accessibility, javascript and
suddenly HTML5 and CCS3, that isn’t supported by all browsers and certainly
isn’t supported by older browsers, is fine to use?



Another thing that Maurice assumes in his calculation of lost blind souls
is that all 7 billion people on this earth speaks English, he may have to
adjust this figure to a less than a single billion and what about
accessibility for the remaining 6 billion? I don’t see accessibility for
minorities that may only speak Spanish, Arabic or other languages on the
RNIB page.



About the blind and severely visual impaired the fact is that special
tools/software are a much better solution that trying to make a webpage
readable for all simply because whatever font we use it will never enable a
blind to read it.



In practice this group of people operates the internet with products like
JAWS, zoomtext. VoiceOver, Blindtype and Fleksy (an iOS keyboard app) or
make use of robobraille.org that supports conversion of text to
sound/Braille and thereby supports Braille displays and embossers.
Robobraille happens to be developed by the National Center for Blind and
Partially Sighted Children in Denmark, an institution which one of my
ancestors Lars Rützou headed in 1909-1935. But also the build in zooming in
iPhone and iPad has been a huge improvement for visually impaired.



I have myself worked with blind people in 10 years because I previous had
the Danish Association of the Blind as a customer (an independent private
association, organized and led by people who are blind or severely visually
impaired).



Please use 4 minutes of your time to see this little film about how blind
and visually impaired works with computers and make notice of the font size
required if you are visually impaired.



http://www.wise-qatar.org/content/robobraille



IMO we do not help people by dragging others down or telling them to
disable a common used browser feature based on fear, we help them by
providing them with innovative technologies that solves their problems – if
that is lack of compassion – let it so be.



Apparently the long lived fear of javascript has survived and that has
nothing to do with helping people with disabilities, it is simply a pure
technical discussion and I don’t have to put anything on my homepage
because people will notice that nothing will work (in my demo) if they
(seeing or blind) has disabled javascript since I use EXT JS that is a pure
OO javascript client framework and has basically no HTML since that is
generated by the OO javascript. So even if I wanted to do so I couldn’t
possible do “progressive enhancement” development.



So if I lose some souls, I lose them because THEY have chosen to deactivate
javascript or maybe have an old browser version than I don’t support, not
because they have a personal disability.



The bottom line is that accessibility can be defined in many ways and there
is no possible way to make worldwide accessibility covering all browsers in
all versions with all possible browser settings and at the same time
provide any languages without extreme cost and feature loss.



We live with a daily choice of what version we support and what features
that has to be installed on both server and client side and that goes for
all persons with or without a personal disability or should we still
support DOS and Win 3.0 based on personal disability rights? Or where do we
draw the line?



I apologize to Maurice if I have offended him, but what I saw was, what I
believed was, a pure technical crusade against javascript advocated with
the offset in a group of people’s disabilities and that is in my book not
okay, especially when I had known and worked with some of these people and
know the pride most feel in being self-helped and able to function in our
seeing world. They don’t want us to change our world; they don’t want us
seeing to come every day to feed them, to bath them or to following them to
the toilet; they just want the tools to be able to navigate in our world
and most will not turn javascript processing off, if that was a barrier to
archive their goal. Never underestimate or diminish a person with a
physical disability because you find yourself better, most seems to have
the never ending melody of Billy Ocean running in their heads … “When the
going gets tough, the tough gets going” – a melody most “normal” find hard
to reach when – the going gets tough!


On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 7:28 PM, Peter Dow <petercdow@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi Maurice,

You seem awfully angry about something. How would blind people be able
to read "Blind people please go away"? Better would be to play an mp3 or
wav file, but then you'd have to be sure they were using HTML5 or some
plugin or another.

--
*Peter Dow* /
Dow Software Services, Inc.
909 793-9050
petercdow@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:petercdow@xxxxxxxxx>
pdow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:pdow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>/

On 1/29/2013 1:18 PM, Maurice O'Prey wrote:

Henrik

Stick that on the front of your web site then, "Blind people please go

away"

I called you an idiot before (sorry I was right!)

-----Original Message-----
From: web400-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:web400-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]

On Behalf Of Henrik Rützou

Sent: 29 January 2013 21:00
To: Web Enabling the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries)
Subject: Re: [WEB400] DB Maintenance Design Patterns

Dean,

with all due respect, we cannot operate a society based on 1 % are blind


On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 9:31 PM, Dean, Robert <rdean@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

wrote:

I think you're missing the point. The main accessibility concern is
sightedness: how does your site perform for a non-visual user agent?

-----Original Message-----
From: web400-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:web400-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Nathan Andelin
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 2:51 PM
To: Web Enabling the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries)
Subject: Re: [WEB400] DB Maintenance Design Patterns

Henrik,

I'm suffering from the same disconnect. How would disabling JavaScript
help users with disabilities? How would impairing the browser improve
accessibility? It doesn't make sense. If you want to help people with
disabilities then provide keyboard short-cuts as alternatives to mouse
events, at least when it concerns to database maintenance.

How would reloading an entire page (brochure-ware) be more accessible
than using AJAX to update field values. Under the former you wait
longer and consume more bandwidth. The latter is n-times more efficient.

I think that arguments can be made for using moderate amounts of
JavaScript. Excessive JavaScript can impair the performance of user
interfaces; make the UI appear sluggish and heavy-weight. But it
doesn't make sense to eschew JavaScript altogether.

Some developers may not want to take the time and initiative to learn
JavaScript. In that case, they may license a wizard to generate it;
consign themselves to the constraints of the wizard.

-Nathan





----- Original Message -----
From: Henrik Rützou <hr@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Web Enabling the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries) <web400@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc:
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 11:37 AM
Subject: Re: [WEB400] DB Maintenance Design Patterns

Maurice,

What is it that gives an employee with a disability, or any employee
for that matter, the right to disable javascript on his work computer?
And why should they? What is the argument?

And what about HTML5 and CSS3 should there also be EU rules forbidding
using these?

I think I can speak for many that the society has to provide
accessibility for most possible people and persons with a disability
has the right to be helped in the best possible way, but that right
doesn’t include the right to refuse to use a common worldwide used and
available technology - that is a complete misunderstanding.

Javascript is an older technology than CSS and javascript is a natural
component of coding webpages as HTML rendering is and it has been it
by decades. Besides that javascript comes with all available browsers
and is an important component if you want to provide cross
browser/device support and thereby common accessibility.

Besides that javascript is activated as standard in all browsers and
IMO, anyone that deliberately adds disability to his/hers browser has
only them self to blame.

To demand EU legislation that any webpage should be able to run in any
persons f***** up browser setting (hereby disabling processing of
program code that is an international ISO/IEC industry standard) as
the lowest common denominator and then use people with a disability as
the platform for the argumentation is to me farfetched and completely
taking out of context.

The world is changing with the speed of light, yesterday we had analog
telephones, max 8bytes pr. second telegraphs from the post office,
analog data transmission and radio beacons for ship navigation, today
we have digital telephones, digital 20Mbit pr. second e-mails from our
homes, gigabyte digital data transmission and GPS satellites for the
same and no one is dreaming of producing a training or film video on
VHS or Betamax because a little stubborn nostalgic group still prefers
or only has access to that technology.

What you are arguing and suggestion is that those of us that develops
modern WEB 2.0 UI’s should start with going back several decades and
develop our base systems based on what technology was available at
that time to support users that prefers that technology and then add
features to make the system more “modern” – and that is as technologic
idiotic as to demand VW to develop a Golf VII based on a Golf I
chassis from 1974 and still get 5 stars in the current EuroNCAP

standard security crash test.

In a broader sense the term “availability/accessibility” has in the
resent years got a new meaning, because who has to be
available/accessible to whom? “I want this and that, I want it today,
I wanted it yesterday and I want more tomorrow, because then my demand
all has changed” doesn’t seems to apply to the current world we live in.

Yesterday is in a technological sense not only bygones, yesterday is
for many people real bygones and those who will survive are those who
manage to adapt to the current technology and situation.

Nobody will survive making software to an IBM I and still compatible
with a
System/36 5363 or a first generation browser – technological bygones
has to be bygones, so has webpages without javascript and that is
where your disability argument doesn’t hold water.



And still the question is in the air, what is the argument for doing so?
--
This is the Web Enabling the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries) (WEB400)
mailing list To post a message email: WEB400@xxxxxxxxxxxx To
subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/web400
or email: WEB400-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at
http://archive.midrange.com/web400.

--
This is the Web Enabling the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries) (WEB400)
mailing list To post a message email: WEB400@xxxxxxxxxxxx To
subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/web400
or email: WEB400-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at
http://archive.midrange.com/web400.

--
Regards,
Henrik Rützou

http://powerEXT.com <http://powerext.com/>
--
This is the Web Enabling the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries) (WEB400) mailing

list To post a message email: WEB400@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe,
unsubscribe, or change list options,

visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/web400
or email: WEB400-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at

http://archive.midrange.com/web400.

--
This is the Web Enabling the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries) (WEB400) mailing
list
To post a message email: WEB400@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/web400
or email: WEB400-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/web400.