[whatwg] Fallback styles for legacy user agents [was: Re:
bhawkeslewis at googlemail.com
Wed Nov 26 14:26:29 PST 2008
> Basically it is a bad idea to mark-up aural properties when it comes to
It does not follow from the fact that popular screen readers ignore
publisher aural/speech CSS or the reasonable argument that they _should_
ignore such CSS, that providing publisher aural/speech CSS is "bad" for
For example, if you want to put a novel online with aural/speech CSS so
it can be read aloud by Opera with the Voice plugin with those styles,
there's no reason why that's bad for accessibility.
It just means that providing aural/speech CSS doesn't do what
well-meaning web developers sometimes imagine it should.
> However, it would still be nice to hide/show things
> solely for specific UAs.
Maybe, but I wonder if in practice, the rationales for this tend to boil
1. Working around bugs in someone's code. (e.g. A screen reader fails to
deal with Feature X in a webpage, so the developer inserts a message for
screen reader users describing a workaround.)
2. A workaround for supporting non-linear, non-gestalt browsing (e.g.
additional context for lists of links in a screen reader).
There may be more direct and effective ways to deal with these problems,
* Making product support information available to all users (what if the
screen reader user has a sighted companion? What if they're using a
screen magnifier/reader combination?)
* Fixing browsers and screen readers.
* Providing explicit markup for additional context.
More information about the whatwg