Accessibility

« Return to Article
  • Kalle 2007-05-23 09:23
    Argh! How ironic isn't this?
  • Strider 2007-05-23 09:24
    so the WTF is that the accessibility web page requires javascript?
    meh
  • Eulbobo 2007-05-23 09:28
    One of the "first" recommendations for accessibility is the possibility for a website to work without javascript enabled.

    Good try, but it's hard to beat the habits
  • Monkios 2007-05-23 09:35
    Eulbobo:
    One of the "first" recommendations for accessibility is the possibility for a website to work without javascript enabled.

    Good try, but it's hard to beat the habits


    The target attribute isn't included in the anchor element in strict XHTML.

    You can do what this guy did or you can change the DTD for your website to allow the target attribute. Most web developper don't know this.
  • W 2007-05-23 09:37
    Monkios:
    Eulbobo:
    One of the "first" recommendations for accessibility is the possibility for a website to work without javascript enabled.

    Good try, but it's hard to beat the habits


    The target attribute isn't included in the anchor element in strict XHTML.

    You can do what this guy did or you can change the DTD for your website to allow the target attribute. Most web developper don't know this.

    Or you can fuck off with the popups and use a regular link.
  • Martijn van Zal 2007-05-23 09:38
    I once saw a site where they did all their hyper links in <a href="#" onclick="document.location='foo.html'">Bar</a> style :)
  • Imroy 2007-05-23 09:43
    Martijn van Zal:
    I once saw a site where they did all their hyper links in <a href="#" onclick="document.location='foo.html'">Bar</a> style :)

    I've seen some like that too. Obviously the web developers didn't use a web browser that uses tabs, because such fake-links totally break tabs. It also breaks web crawlers, so Google is not going to have much past their homepage cached and indexed. Serves them right... :D
  • Robert 2007-05-23 09:55
    Imroy:
    Martijn van Zal:
    I once saw a site where they did all their hyper links in <a href="#" onclick="document.location='foo.html'">Bar</a> style :)

    I've seen some like that too. Obviously the web developers didn't use a web browser that uses tabs, because such fake-links totally break tabs. It also breaks web crawlers, so Google is not going to have much past their homepage cached and indexed. Serves them right... :D


    Could also be intended...
  • Noah Slater 2007-05-23 10:12
    The term "differently abled" is offensive to me as a disabled person, as is your assumption that all of your readers are able bodied.

    I am a disabled person and I read your site - please don't refer to me as if:

    a) I am "different" is some way
    b) I should not be reading your site due to my disablement
  • CP 2007-05-23 10:15
    That really wasn't the point, Noah. We can't call cell phones "disabled computers". They really are "differently able" computers, and that's what the joke was about.
  • Noah Slater 2007-05-23 10:19
    No, you are right - it wasn't his major point, the objectionable language was used seriously.

    I quote:

    "As long as we, the majority, can access content, that’s all that really matters."

    How would this make you feel as a disabled reader? Alienated? Maybe you will reply "no" but the fact of the matter is that this language distances this site from disabled readers.

    It's subtle, but it's important.
  • Rick 2007-05-23 10:20
    Robert:
    Imroy:
    Martijn van Zal:
    I once saw a site where they did all their hyper links in <a href="#" onclick="document.location='foo.html'">Bar</a> style :)

    I've seen some like that too. Obviously the web developers didn't use a web browser that uses tabs, because such fake-links totally break tabs. It also breaks web crawlers, so Google is not going to have much past their homepage cached and indexed. Serves them right... :D


    Could also be intended...


    Well, if they truly didn't want Google to index their site, there are better ways to accomplish that. Things like robots.txt.
  • Anynomous 2007-05-23 10:20
    Noah Slater:
    The term "differently abled" is offensive to me as a disabled person, as is your assumption that all of your readers are able bodied.

    I am a disabled person and I read your site - please don't refer to me as if:

    a) I am "different" is some way
    b) I should not be reading your site due to my disablement


    You're right, mentioning handicaps in any way, especially for a story involving accessibility, is totally unacceptable. /sarcasm

    Damnit man, what do you want? You say you're offended at disabilities being ignored then say you're offended about being called 'different.' It's a bit hard to not assume everyone is able bodied if we aren't allowed to even NOTICE disabilities!!!
  • Steve 2007-05-23 10:23
    Noah Slater:
    The term "differently abled" is offensive to me as a disabled person, as is your assumption that all of your readers are able bodied.

    I am a disabled person and I read your site - please don't refer to me as if:

    a) I am "different" is some way
    b) I should not be reading your site due to my disablement

    Sorry point a makes no sense to me "disabled" (a label you use about yourself) is as much a label indicating difference as "differently abled" is. I see where you're coming from with point b ("we the majority").
  • diaphanein 2007-05-23 10:24
    Noah Slater:
    No, you are right - it wasn't his major point, the objectionable language was used seriously.

    I quote:

    "As long as we, the majority, can access content, that’s all that really matters."

    How would this make you feel as a disabled reader? Alienated? Maybe you will reply "no" but the fact of the matter is that this language distances this site from disabled readers.

    It's subtle, but it's important.

    I'm offended by your being offended. Since I'm offended by something you did, you must stop it. So, stop being offended. That's how things work in Bizaro land.
  • Noah Slater 2007-05-23 10:28
    > You're right, mentioning handicaps in any way, especially for
    > a story involving accessibility, is totally unacceptable.

    The term "handicaps" is SO offensive I can only assume it was satire.

    > You say you're offended at disabilities being ignored

    Can you quote me on that?

    > then say you're offended about being called 'different.'

    Yes, and about being mentally segregated from the normal readership of the site.

    Can you imagine if the post read:

    "Anyway, issues with 'differently coloured people' doesn't matter as long as us whites are more dominant."

    Can you imagine reading this as a black man?

    It's just the same...

    > It's a bit hard to not assume everyone is able bodied if
    > we aren't allowed to even NOTICE disabilities!!!

    I never asked you not to "notice", instead only:

    a) Not to label, just like "differently coloured persons"
    b) Not to segregate, just like "us whites"
  • Noah Slater 2007-05-23 10:29
    Actually, it depend which model of disability you subscribe to .

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disability

    I subscribe to the social model in which I am "disabled" by society - whereas to label me as someone "with" a disability is wrong.

  • cyclops 2007-05-23 10:31
    Am I the only one who thought the phrase "As long as we, the majority, can access content, that’s all that really matters." was sarcasm in the context it was used?
  • keen and able 2007-05-23 10:32
    Noah Slater:
    The term "differently abled" is offensive to me as a disabled person, as is your assumption that all of your readers are able bodied.

    I am a disabled person and I read your site - please don't refer to me as if:

    a) I am "different" is some way
    b) I should not be reading your site due to my disablement


    I'm with Stumpy Joe on this one
  • The MAZZTer 2007-05-23 10:33
    Alex clearly did not intend to insult or offend, so drop it. It's one thing when someone purposefully hurts minorities in this matter, it's another when it's done accidentally but the minority makes a big fuss about it. Your disability, whatever it might be, does not excuse your attitude.
  • Noah Slater 2007-05-23 10:34
    Yes, I think you may be right.
  • cyclops 2007-05-23 10:34
    Am I the only one who thought the phrase "As long as we, the majority, can access content, that’s all that really matters." was sarcasm in the context it was used?
  • Noah Slater 2007-05-23 10:36
    Intention does not get anyone off the hook. It's the collective ignorance of the masses that hurts minorities - not individual malice.

    Anyway, what attitude are you speaking of? Should I be afraid to voice my opinion in case YOU don't like it?
  • SomeoneElse 2007-05-23 10:36
    cyclops:
    Am I the only one who thought the phrase "As long as we, the majority, can access content, that’s all that really matters." was sarcasm in the context it was used?


    No, But I long ago learned that most readers of this web site are incapable of recognizing sarcasm, even when it is beating the crap out of them.
  • Noah Slater 2007-05-23 10:37
    Cheers keen and able!

    - Stumpy.
  • KM 2007-05-23 10:38
    Monkios:
    Eulbobo:
    One of the "first" recommendations for accessibility is the possibility for a website to work without javascript enabled.

    Good try, but it's hard to beat the habits


    The target attribute isn't included in the anchor element in strict XHTML.

    You can do what this guy did or you can change the DTD for your website to allow the target attribute. Most web developper don't know this.

    Or you can do it in a standards conforming way by including a real href and an onclick handler:
    <a href="blah.html" onclick="popup(this.href); return false">blah</a>

    There's other more sophisticated methods too, but this is a very easy simple example.
  • me 2007-05-23 10:40
    It's a basic rule of the internet - no matter how obvious you make the sarcasm, someone will take it seriously :D
  • Mike Nuss 2007-05-23 10:41
    cyclops:
    Am I the only one who thought the phrase "As long as we, the majority, can access content, that’s all that really matters." was sarcasm in the context it was used?


    Yes, it was pretty obviously a joke. Sheesh.
  • Alcari 2007-05-23 10:42
    Noah Slater:
    > You're right, mentioning handicaps in any way, especially for
    > a story involving accessibility, is totally unacceptable.

    The term "handicaps" is SO offensive I can only assume it was satire.



    Hey, my handicap is 28...why is it offensive?
    On a more serious note, Handicap simply means "Hindrance" what's the problem with it?

    Noah Slater:

    > It's a bit hard to not assume everyone is able bodied if
    > we aren't allowed to even NOTICE disabilities!!!

    I never asked you not to "notice", instead only:

    a) Not to label, just like "differently coloured persons"
    b) Not to segregate, just like "us whites"

    So, we should notice it, but not say or do anything about it. Gotcha, I'll be completely ignoring it from now on.

    If we shouldn't segragate, let's not build any more wheelchair ramps, lets dig up all the ticking traffic lights and build every website solely in .jpg.

    My point is, if you want provisions for whatever is bothering you, there SHOULD be seggregation, it's not always a bad thing. Without it, there would be no schools for the blind, no hearing aids, no glasses.
  • tmountjr 2007-05-23 10:42
    TRWTF is that this discussion somehow turned from web standards to political correctness.
  • SomeoneElse 2007-05-23 10:44
    Noah Slater:
    The term "differently abled" is offensive to me as a disabled person, as is your assumption that all of your readers are able bodied.

    I am a disabled person and I read your site - please don't refer to me as if:

    a) I am "different" is some way
    b) I should not be reading your site due to my disablement


    First, No one can keep up with the current PC words/phrases we are supposed to use, so I think you are being a bit thin-skinned about the "differently abled" part. As far as I knew, that was the current popular PC euphemism to use.

    Second, I do believe, after re-reading the article, that Alex was actually criticizing the in-accessibilty of most web sites. In effect, saying that the web dev world should be ashamed at not even making real attempts to make their sites accessible.

    But then again, WTF do I know?

  • Alcari 2007-05-23 10:46
    Aren't the internets beautifull?

    Captcha: Smile :)
  • keen and able 2007-05-23 10:50
    Noah Slater:
    Cheers keen and able!

    - Stumpy.


    I'd say that this is proof that Noah is very much capable of taking a joke. Why are so many people kicking up a stink at Noah kicking up a stink? I've always found that if I offend someone, a polite "sorry I offended you" is enough, not picking holes in everything he says.

    If Noah is offended, then that's well within his rights, in the same way that anyone else can be pi$$ed off and tell people as much.
  • Noah Slater 2007-05-23 10:51
    I have taken back my comments about segregation due to the obvious sarcasm which I missed initially.

    To the commenter who mention hearing aids etc... these are not forms of segregation.

    http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/~ronald/HandicapDefinition.htm

    Anyway... I am going to bow out now as there is nothing left to put.

    Queue the 14 year old d00ds misquoting me and making further issue from this.
  • Freddy Bob 2007-05-23 10:55
    Martijn van Zal:
    I once saw a site where they did all their hyper links in <a href="#" onclick="document.location='foo.html'">Bar</a> style :)

    I have seen better than that. I worked on code that had a form entirely made up of hidden elements. The links were
    <a href='#' onclick='this.form.one="hughie";this.form.two="dewie";this.form.three="louie";this.form.submit()'>Whatever</a>

    There could have been a fraction of a point if the form method had been POST. There was no reason at all not to have made the links URLs.
  • PJH 2007-05-23 11:00
    Noah Slater:
    The term "differently abled" is offensive to me as a disabled person, as is your assumption that all of your readers are able bodied.
    Turn on your humo(u)r detector.
    I am a disabled person and I read your site -
    Does your disability have any relevance to the code given? Are you partially/fully blind? Quadriplegic? Or are you just in a wheelchair or have learning difficulties?
    please don't refer to me as if:

    a) I am "different" is some way
    Tough. You are. We're all unique, just like everyone else
    b) I should not be reading your site due to my disablement
    Get over yourself and quit it with the self pity.

    Assuming of course you do in fact have a real disability, and are not trolling this forum.

    IMHO IHBT.
  • erKURITA 2007-05-23 11:03
    I wonder...

    Why does the link to this WTF is called AcceBiBility. Is it a WTF itself?
  • Ted 2007-05-23 11:13
    erKURITA:
    Why does the link to this WTF is called AcceBiBility. Is it a WTF itself?
    Sounds to me like the programmer of the WTF website is German. Strasse -> Straße
  • Sgt. Preston 2007-05-23 11:20
    me:
    It's a basic rule of the internet - no matter how obvious you make the sarcasm, someone will take it seriously :D

    This instance looked like pretty clear sarcasm to me and that's how I read it, but I have been guilty of failing to recognize sarcasm in this forum when the particular instance was so lame that it was hard to identify as sarcasm. That is, when it was pointed out to me that the comment was sarcastic, I could only ask "Where's the irony? Where's the wit?"
  • dp.design 2007-05-23 11:21
    Noah Slater:
    > You're right, mentioning handicaps in any way, especially for
    > a story involving accessibility, is totally unacceptable.

    The term "handicaps" is SO offensive I can only assume it was satire.

    > You say you're offended at disabilities being ignored

    Can you quote me on that?

    > then say you're offended about being called 'different.'

    Yes, and about being mentally segregated from the normal readership of the site.

    Can you imagine if the post read:

    "Anyway, issues with 'differently coloured people' doesn't matter as long as us whites are more dominant."

    Can you imagine reading this as a black man?

    It's just the same...

    > It's a bit hard to not assume everyone is able bodied if
    > we aren't allowed to even NOTICE disabilities!!!

    I never asked you not to "notice", instead only:

    a) Not to label, just like "differently coloured persons"
    b) Not to segregate, just like "us whites"


    It sounds like you are not comfortable with yourself or your disability, whatever that may be.

    A cookie might make you feel better. I've got some hidden on the top shelf of the upstairs closet, the one with the outward-swinging double doors. Help yourself. Just to warn you, though, the red ones taste like crap; go for the green ones instead...just shake the jar, the green ones clank and the red ones clink.
  • Grant Johnson 2007-05-23 11:24
    I think you missed the point. He was not poking fun at disabled people. He WAS poking at the fact that although we do this ridiculous politically correct language to try not to offend anyone, we do not do anything that will really help, like making websites accessible. That is, at least, until it starts affecting the bottom line.
  • abx 2007-05-23 11:25
    Perhaps "the real wtf" is the disability everybody displays when it comes to recognizing a troll? come on, you're supposed to be good at this by now
  • Disgruntled 2007-05-23 11:26
    Google now requires Javascript to access the alternate services from the page www.google.com.

    In Lynx, for example, the links simply don't appear.

    And as for the "as long as a majority" that's really mocking not those who have problems with "fancy" web sites, but the programmers, designers, and management that think it's ok to get 80% of the audience and blow off the rest.

    My company's meeting room reservation system works only with Internet Explorer, for example. Somebody got cute with the Javascript.
  • Sgt. Preston 2007-05-23 11:26
    PJH:
    Turn on your humo(u)r detector.

    I am totally offended by your patronizing way of accommodating my spelling preference.
  • MeMe 2007-05-23 11:39
    OK, I will ignore any 'differences' of "differently abled"
    peoples.

    I MUST now always park in a so-called handicap parking spot, to prove that I do not discriminate.

    Noah, give me your address so you can pay the tickets of those dolts who do not understand non-differences.
  • Capt Obvious 2007-05-23 11:46
    Sgt. Preston:
    "Where's the irony?"


    Under the stairs with the ironing board, where it always is, dear.
  • Offended 2007-05-23 11:58
    I'm pretty much offended by the way this site mocks "Brillant" people who writes "enterprisey" software!
    Those people shows creativity in writing extremely complex solutions for the simplest problems and are brave enough to deliver a skeleton object as an industrial strength component!
    How you dare, you so called "normal"* developers, to discriminate them?

    * of course, as everybody, I belive I'm better than "normal", at least until my code gets submited to the WTF

    NOTE: For those "different able" sarcasm wise, this was an humorous post
    NOTE2: Yes, not a good one
    NOTE3: WTF???????

    NOTE4: my captcha is "doom"... it worries me
  • aaaaaaaa 2007-05-23 12:04
    Noah Slater:
    > You're right, mentioning handicaps in any way, especially for
    > a story involving accessibility, is totally unacceptable.

    The term "handicaps" is SO offensive I can only assume it was satire.

    > You say you're offended at disabilities being ignored

    Can you quote me on that?

    > then say you're offended about being called 'different.'

    Yes, and about being mentally segregated from the normal readership of the site.

    Can you imagine if the post read:

    "Anyway, issues with 'differently coloured people' doesn't matter as long as us whites are more dominant."

    Can you imagine reading this as a black man?

    It's just the same...

    > It's a bit hard to not assume everyone is able bodied if
    > we aren't allowed to even NOTICE disabilities!!!

    I never asked you not to "notice", instead only:

    a) Not to label, just like "differently coloured persons"
    b) Not to segregate, just like "us whites"


    I get it - He's RETARDED!

    OMG - Must Call PC Police
  • Yawwwwn 2007-05-23 12:05
    Noah Slater:
    No, you are right - it wasn't his major point, the objectionable language was used seriously.

    I quote:

    "As long as we, the majority, can access content, that’s all that really matters."

    How would this make you feel as a disabled reader? Alienated? Maybe you will reply "no" but the fact of the matter is that this language distances this site from disabled readers.

    It's subtle, but it's important.



    Your sarcasm meter is...








    wait for it...








    ... disabled.
  • AC 2007-05-23 12:06
    cyclops:
    Am I the only one who thought the phrase "As long as we, the majority, can access content, that’s all that really matters." was sarcasm in the context it was used?


    You're not alone - I'm not really sure why you'd read this as anything but sarcasm.
  • Kent Mentolado 2007-05-23 12:12
    <a onclick="window.open(this.href); return false;" href="http://www.google.com/">

    XHTML Strict, and works without javascript too.
  • Anony-Moose 2007-05-23 12:12
    lol
  • wgc 2007-05-23 12:13
    cyclops:
    Am I the only one who thought the phrase "As long as we, the majority, can access content, that’s all that really matters." was sarcasm in the context it was used?


    Obviously the disability one of the person doing the complaining is a failed sarcasm detector. Quick, someone start a donation fund for his/her transplant!
  • ... 2007-05-23 12:15
    Noah Slater:
    > You're right, mentioning handicaps in any way, especially for
    > a story involving accessibility, is totally unacceptable.

    The term "handicaps" is SO offensive I can only assume it was satire.

    > You say you're offended at disabilities being ignored

    Can you quote me on that?

    > then say you're offended about being called 'different.'

    Yes, and about being mentally segregated from the normal readership of the site.

    Can you imagine if the post read:

    "Anyway, issues with 'differently coloured people' doesn't matter as long as us whites are more dominant."

    Can you imagine reading this as a black man?

    It's just the same...

    > It's a bit hard to not assume everyone is able bodied if
    > we aren't allowed to even NOTICE disabilities!!!

    I never asked you not to "notice", instead only:

    a) Not to label, just like "differently coloured persons"
    b) Not to segregate, just like "us whites"



    get. over. it.

    fucking whiners...
  • dolo54 2007-05-23 12:17
    To Noah: Please read this article on euphemisms http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism

    It explains why all euphemisms are stupid and ultimately pointless, such as 'retarded' at one point was a nicer way of saying 'idiot'. But because it ultimately had the same connotation as 'idiot' it too fell out of favor. 'Differently-abled' was used sarcastically as it is as retarded a euphemism as they come!
  • dolo54 2007-05-23 12:22
    Plus, exactly term would you prefer? "Handy-capable"??? Plenty of black people I know have said that the term "people of color" is fairly offensive in that it sounds pretty much like "colored" where as "black" is totally fine with them.
  • KattMan 2007-05-23 12:23
    Noah Slater:
    I have taken back my comments about segregation due to the obvious sarcasm which I missed initially.

    To the commenter who mention hearing aids etc... these are not forms of segregation.

    http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/~ronald/HandicapDefinition.htm

    Anyway... I am going to bow out now as there is nothing left to put.

    Queue the 14 year old d00ds misquoting me and making further issue from this.


    Oh oh I'm much older than 14 but can I misquote you too? In my infinite wisdom I know I should always ask permission first.
  • operagost 2007-05-23 12:23
    The irony is that a leftist would call me prejudiced or insensitive for calling Noah "disabled," event though he prefers the word to "differently abled."

    The left creates new PC terms like "differently abled" every ten years or so. They are uncomfortable with minorities-- having taken advantage of them for so long-- that they must do something to remove the perceived "stigma" attached to the old name.
  • dolo54 2007-05-23 12:35
    operagost:
    The irony is that a leftist would call me prejudiced or insensitive for calling Noah "disabled," event though he prefers the word to "differently abled."

    The left creates new PC terms like "differently abled" every ten years or so. They are uncomfortable with minorities-- having taken advantage of them for so long-- that they must do something to remove the perceived "stigma" attached to the old name.

    Ummm ok. wait no. must resist urge. to. feel. troll!
  • James 2007-05-23 12:35
    Noah Slater is the Jesse Jackson of handicapped people.
  • Michael Buschbeck 2007-05-23 12:36
    Ted:
    erKURITA:
    Why does the link to this WTF is called AcceBiBility. Is it a WTF itself?
    Sounds to me like the programmer of the WTF website is German. Strasse -> Straße

    Ugh. If that assumption is true, the programmer is in desperate need of a German language course. (But the programmer's presumed nationality aside, your explanation sounds disturbingly plausible.)

    There is no trivial mapping of "ss" to "ß" in German. We do use double-s in our language; "ß" is a distinct character, even though it's occasionally transcribed as "ss" where the "ß" letter isn't available (in plain ASCII, for example). In some cases "ss" vs. "ß" makes all the difference between distinct words, e.g. "Masse" (de) = "mass" (en), "Maße" (de) = "measurements" (en).
  • Cochrane 2007-05-23 12:36
    Monkios:
    Eulbobo:
    One of the "first" recommendations for accessibility is the possibility for a website to work without javascript enabled.

    Good try, but it's hard to beat the habits


    The target attribute isn't included in the anchor element in strict XHTML.

    You can do what this guy did or you can change the DTD for your website to allow the target attribute. Most web developper don't know this.


    Or you can use the target attribute even though it's strict XHTML. The impact on actual operation is the same as altering the DTD, only less work.
  • Lucas Goodwin 2007-05-23 12:38
    DOWN WITH POLITICALLY CORRECT! Truly love it when people who are different from some social/political/physical majority take offense to the most retarded of comments.

    Why should I bend to your whims if you won't bend to mine?

    Captcha: burned - I oh so wanted to burn every over sensitive group I could think of in this comment.
  • kungfu 2007-05-23 12:46
    SomeoneElse:
    First, No one can keep up with the current PC words/phrases we are supposed to use, so I think you are being a bit thin-skinned about the "differently abled" part. As far as I knew, that was the current popular PC euphemism to use.

    Because it became the defacto PC euphemism, it is now not PC.
  • Lucas Goodwin 2007-05-23 12:47
    On topic:

    Popups are just bad design even with-out the added irony of putting a pop-up link on the term accessibility.

    I'll never understand why designers try to make webpages behave like client apps. Web pages are good at static display. Client apps are good at interaction. People predominately don't go to websites to interact. They go to websites to find information. Interaction should be the rarity in a design for the web, not the majority.
  • T604 2007-05-23 13:20
    Lucas Goodwin:
    On topic:
    People predominately don't go to websites to interact. They go to websites to find information. Interaction should be the rarity in a design for the web, not the majority.


    Hello, its not 1995 anymore. Yes "teh intar-webs" weren't really designed to be (ab)used the way they are today. However the web is not used as an academic repository anymore. When I do my banking online, post on forums, buy books I want interactivity. Hell most information repositories are interactive (wikis). The fact that you can do so much with http really is amazing and yes it wasn't intended for the degree of interactivity we're accustomed to now. Still most people are accustomed to it and expect it.
  • T604 2007-05-23 13:20
    Lucas Goodwin:
    On topic:
    People predominately don't go to websites to interact. They go to websites to find information. Interaction should be the rarity in a design for the web, not the majority.


    Hello, its not 1995 anymore. Yes "teh intar-webs" weren't really designed to be (ab)used the way they are today. However the web is not used as an academic repository anymore. When I do my banking online, post on forums, buy books I want interactivity. Hell most information repositories are interactive (wikis). The fact that you can do so much with http really is amazing and yes it wasn't intended for the degree of interactivity we're accustomed to now. Still most people are accustomed to it and expect it.
  • Anonymous Coward 2007-05-23 13:28
    Noah Slater:
    No, you are right - it wasn't his major point, the objectionable language was used seriously.

    I quote:

    "As long as we, the majority, can access content, that’s all that really matters."

    How would this make you feel as a disabled reader? Alienated? Maybe you will reply "no" but the fact of the matter is that this language distances this site from disabled readers.


    Actually, taking sentence immediately before that into account, I think that was sarcasm.
  • seejay 2007-05-23 13:39
    dolo54:
    Ummm ok. wait no. must resist urge. to. feel. troll!


    I find them lumpy and squishy when I feel them. Kinda like the week-old rotten kiwi I found under the counter yesterday (silly cats!)

    -- Seejay
  • Gsquared 2007-05-23 13:40
    Noah Slater:
    Actually, it depend which model of disability you subscribe to .

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disability

    I subscribe to the social model in which I am "disabled" by society - whereas to label me as someone "with" a disability is wrong.

    And yet again, the language is crippled by someone who just plain doesn't understand the words. "Dis" = not, against, missing; "ability" = a capacity or skill to accomplish or do something. Thus, "disability" simply means "lacking a skill or capacity to accomplish something". Is a blind person "disabled"? Well, he/she does not have the capacity to see, ipso, he/she is "dis"-"able" to see, ipso, "disabled". Same for someone lacking legs = lacking the abilities for which legs are necessary = disabled.

    Is that a pejorative or insulting term? Not at all. It expresses a simple fact. Claiming it is "bad" or "offensive" to use that term means, in general, it is "bad" or "offensive" to ever, in any way, describe anyone at all. Thus, if you are offended by simple words being used to describe a state, you should simply ignore all language used anywhere by anyone. If you never listen to anyone and never read anything, you will never be offended.

    You must be equally offended by the words, "age", "gender", "height", "weight", "hair color", etc., so whatever you do, don't get a driver's license or passport. Those words are just exactly as "offensive" as "disabled", because they do exactly the same thing, they describe a state.

    Alex was making a joke. This is, primarily, a humor site for light entertainment. Attacking people for making jokes about how overdone political correctness is (politcal correctness can be defined as, "lying your ass off so that you can avoid losing any votes, because being 'inoffensive' is more important than being honest"), is just dishonest, in my opinion.

    And before you go on some all out attack on me, keep in mind that I've got phyiscal disabilities that hamper my ability to participate in a large number of normal activities. I'm not some majority trying to "keep you down". I'm just sick of people taking perfectly normal words that have absolutely no pejorative meaning, and claiming to be offended by them, just so they can get up on some high horse and make themselves feel superior to others.

    Had Alex been making fun of someone with a disability, that would be, at best, very bad manners, and taking him to task for it would be appropriate. He was, however, making fun of someone messing up their website's ability to deal with the very thing this code was meant to help.

    So, you could say the person who wrote that code was disabled, because he/she can't write code well (lacking an ability). From that point of view, the whole site is one huge mass of offensiveness, and you should just stay away from it. You should also stay away from all other websites that have any humor or opinion on them at all, and stick to technical sites with nothing but mathematical formulae on them.

    So, now I'll get off my high horse, since I've adequately expressed my own view of my own superiority. Ha! Take that!

    Oh, and if the subject at hand had to do with skin pigmentation, as opposed to web site features for the visually impaired, then "people of color" shouldn't be offensive either. For example, in a discussion of sunburn, the statement, "pale skin, like that possessed by caucasians, is more succeptible to sunburn than more heavily melinized skin, such as that possed by people of color, and thus requires a higher SPF sunscreen to be safe". Would you consider that statement offensive? Should it be avoided, thus leaving the subject dangerously incomplete (skin cancer kills, this statement could save lives)? Your statements and attitude are thus capable of resulting in death. Do you still defend them in that circumstance? Is being politically correct, avoiding potential offense at all possible cost, more important than human lives?
  • dillybar1 2007-05-23 14:03
    <a href="../accessibility.htm" onclick="javascript:popup(this.href);return false;">Accessibility</a>
  • Anon 2007-05-23 14:09
    I once had a job interview for a position that transformed from 'backend systerms developer' to 'web developer' the closer I got to the intervier date. After looking at the source of their site, I decided to go in anyhow just for the hell of it.

    They proudly touted their xhtml strict compliance and accessability right on the site. Being the smartass that I am, I asked them to explain the risk / benifit of wrapping all the content in javascript widgets (page was useless without it turned on), all the 'target=' popups (page didn't validate) and all the forms that died horrible dealths without javascript enabled. Etc, etc, etc.

    The answer I got was:

    "Why should we care about blind people or cripples wanting to use the site? Who cares about them? I know I don't".

    That job interview went well, I assure you.


    (captcha == sanitarium, heh)
  • Sigivald 2007-05-23 14:20
    Disgruntled: Feature!

    Not seeing those extra links in lynx makes it <I>faster</i> than Google's normal "Jesus Christ why's it so farkin' hard to search with lynx?" interface, doesn't it?

    Honestly, I wish they'd check the agent - assuming lynx reports itself honestly - and do something special and <I>sensible</i> for lynx/links users.
  • A Nonny Mouse 2007-05-23 15:21
    Sgt. Preston:
    PJH:
    Turn on your humo(u)r detector.

    I am totally offended by your patronizing way of accommodating my spelling preference.


    xD
  • Spectre 2007-05-23 15:27
    Ted:
    erKURITA:
    Why does the link to this WTF is called AcceBiBility. Is it a WTF itself?
    Sounds to me like the programmer of the WTF website is German. Strasse -> Straße


    While I can understand the ss -> ß mapping, replacing letters with their ASCII lookalikes is ridiculous. It's even funnier in the Russian version. Ы is translated to b. Ь too. I just wonder what would be Ъ translated to? Maybe... b?
    The other russian letters seem to be simply transliterated. WTF?

    I wonder what was the point behind ß -> B? Transliteration seems to make much more sense (though ss -> ß -> ss is woodentablish).
  • Rich 2007-05-23 15:33
    Gsquared:
    For example, in a discussion of sunburn, the statement, "pale skin, like that possessed by caucasians, is more succeptible to sunburn than more heavily melinized skin, such as that possed by people of color, and thus requires a higher SPF sunscreen to be safe".


    What I find offensive is the implication that I am a person without color.

    Rich
  • no, YOUR name! 2007-05-23 15:34
    Lucas Goodwin:
    I'll never understand why designers try to make webpages behave like client apps. Web pages are good at static display. Client apps are good at interaction. People predominately don't go to websites to interact. They go to websites to find information. Interaction should be the rarity in a design for the web, not the majority.

    Sounds like someone is Web-2.0-disabled. Hey man, I feel your pain. My browser lost its CSS in a terrible car accident.
  • Arancaytar 2007-05-23 15:39
    The content of accessibility.htm:


    <HTM><BODY BGCOLOR=WHITE ONLOAD=javascript:alert("Welcome to our accessibility page.");><HEAD><TITLE>Accessibility</HEAD></BODY>
    </HTM>Accessibility. We don't give a flying
    <FONT COLOR=BLUE FACE=TAHOMA>CRAP
    <FONT COLOR=NORMAL FACE=TIMES> about it, thanks
    for asking.</HTM></BODY>
  • Neil 2007-05-23 15:43
    cyclops:
    Am I the only one who thought the phrase "As long as we, the majority, can access content, that’s all that really matters." was sarcasm in the context it was used?


    Exactly
  • mrprogguy 2007-05-23 16:01
    cyclops:
    Am I the only one who thought the phrase "As long as we, the majority, can access content, that’s all that really matters." was sarcasm in the context it was used?


    That's what I took away from it. I would have called it 'ironic overstatement' (or maybe "Floyd"), but sarcasm works just as well.

    It was clearly intended to be tongue-in-cheek.

    Oh crap. Now I've offended all those readers without tongues. Or cheeks. Or both.

    Damn. By writing "oh crap," I've offended all those people that can't crap.
  • phaedrus 2007-05-23 16:08
    dolo54:
    To Noah: Please read this article on euphemisms http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism

    It explains why all euphemisms are stupid and ultimately pointless, such as 'retarded' at one point was a nicer way of saying 'idiot'. But because it ultimately had the same connotation as 'idiot' it too fell out of favor. 'Differently-abled' was used sarcastically as it is as retarded a euphemism as they come!


    Yeah. I'm going to have to agree on that, "differently abled" was dead as a euphemism the day my college Electromagnetism introduced this solution to Maxwell's Equations as the "Differently Abled Potential." He's British and teaching at an American University, so we all laughed, and he looked at us in horror and followed up with, "That's terrible! You shouldn't laugh at that!"

    Ah, culture clash.
  • Random832 2007-05-23 16:21
    Noah Slater:
    No, you are right - it wasn't his major point, the objectionable language was used seriously.
    (...)
    It's subtle,


    And, apparently, so was the sarcasm.
  • Random832 2007-05-23 16:24
    Anyway, TRWTF is that he's clearly aware of the bug, since he made a special case to cover it up for ClaBics Week, but didn't bother actually fixing it
  • codeman38 2007-05-23 16:29
    Spectre:
    While I can understand the ss -> ß mapping, replacing letters with their ASCII lookalikes is ridiculous. It's even funnier in the Russian version. Ы is translated to b. Ь too. I just wonder what would be Ъ translated to? Maybe... b?
    The other russian letters seem to be simply transliterated. WTF?

    Even more oddly, on the Russian site, "сс" is converted into "B". There are several "nedelya klaBiki" posts. Not sure what sort of weird round-trip transliteration is going on here!
  • AC 2007-05-23 16:36
    Noah Slater:
    The term "differently abled" is offensive to me as a disabled person, as is your assumption that all of your readers are able bodied.

    I am a disabled person and I read your site - please don't refer to me as if:

    a) I am "different" is some way
    b) I should not be reading your site due to my disablement


    Perhaps you should have thought of this before you made the link to your accessibility page require javascript. Obviously you need to read the site much more if that is the kind of code you produce.
  • my name 2007-05-23 16:49
    Not only google. For example, they wanted to prevent user from mirroring their site with offline browser.
  • jbinaz 2007-05-23 16:58
    Noah Slater:
    No, you are right - it wasn't his major point, the objectionable language was used seriously.

    I quote:

    "As long as we, the majority, can access content, that’s all that really matters."


    Maybe I inserted my own <sarcasm> tag, but I thought it was there.

    jbinaz

  • lrb 2007-05-23 17:23
    Rich:
    Gsquared:
    For example, in a discussion of sunburn, the statement, "pale skin, like that possessed by caucasians, is more succeptible to sunburn than more heavily melinized skin, such as that possed by people of color, and thus requires a higher SPF sunscreen to be safe".


    What I find offensive is the implication that I am a person without color.

    Rich


    It's not that you're without color, but rather you are "colorly challenged". So instead of "people of color" we should use "colorly enhanced".
  • lrb 2007-05-23 17:28
    Noah Slater:
    The term "differently abled" is offensive to me as a disabled person, as is your assumption that all of your readers are able bodied.

    I am a disabled person and I read your site - please don't refer to me as if:

    a) I am "different" is some way
    b) I should not be reading your site due to my disablement


    It offends me to no end that it is not legal to shoot habitial whiners of those who don't use the whiner's version of favor de jeur of polical correct speak. I was born with the "shoot the damn whiney-ass polical correct control freak" gene, and it is blatant discrimination to try and deny me the blissful joy of giving into my natural inclinations.
  • Zelda Fan 2007-05-23 18:03
    Martijn van Zal:
    I once saw a site where they did all their hyper links in <a href="#" onclick="document.location='foo.html'">Bar</a> style :)


    Weren't they featured on the Daily WTF?
  • Joseph Newton 2007-05-23 18:22
    Noah Slater:
    No, you are right - it wasn't his major point, the objectionable language was used seriously.

    I quote:

    "As long as we, the majority, can access content, that’s all that really matters."

    How would this make you feel as a disabled reader? Alienated? Maybe you will reply "no" but the fact of the matter is that this language distances this site from disabled readers.

    It's subtle, but it's important.


    Noah, you are missing the point. One ability you will have to develop if you wish to enjoy the discourse here is the ability to recognize sarcasm. The article concerned the cynical attitude of the IT industry towards accessibility. The sentence you cite was an attempt to characterize the underlying attitude expresed in design and marketing decisions.

    As to terminology, well, that's up to you. You can be as "disabled" as you choose. Those persons with disabilities whom I choose to associate with do not make that choice. Each recognizes that he or she differs from the majority in one or another capacity, expects and asserts the right to reasonable accomommations, and otherwise moves on with life with the set of abilities he or she does possess.

    I suggest you do likewise.
  • Caleb 2007-05-23 18:28
    Another WTF that I don't think anyone has mentioned:
    The popup is pointing to a page within the same site. It is standard practice to keep internal links in the same window and only create new ones, at most, for external links.
  • Jon 2007-05-23 18:46
    Kent Mentolado:
    <a onclick="window.open(this.href); return false;" href="http://www.google.com/">

    XHTML Strict, and works without javascript too.
    <a href="http://www.google.com/">

    XHTML Strict, and works without javascript, and isn't pointless and annoying.
  • yet another Matt 2007-05-23 19:15
    at least its not a flash animation.
  • anon 2007-05-23 19:25
    seriously, stfu. whining like this is why the discrimination you speak of happens.
  • anon 2007-05-23 19:27
    hmm, i forgot how much of a wtf this forum is.

    the above should be quoting:

    Noah Slater:
    Intention does not get anyone off the hook. It's the collective ignorance of the masses that hurts minorities - not individual malice.

    Anyway, what attitude are you speaking of? Should I be afraid to voice my opinion in case YOU don't like it?
  • iw 2007-05-23 22:26
    I'm sure the accessibility page itself says something like:

    "Accessibility: You can't."
  • cklam 2007-05-24 00:15
    Noah Slater:
    > You're right, mentioning handicaps in any way, especially for
    > a story involving accessibility, is totally unacceptable.

    The term "handicaps" is SO offensive I can only assume it was satire.

    > You say you're offended at disabilities being ignored

    Can you quote me on that?

    > then say you're offended about being called 'different.'

    Yes, and about being mentally segregated from the normal readership of the site.

    Can you imagine if the post read:

    "Anyway, issues with 'differently coloured people' doesn't matter as long as us whites are more dominant."

    Can you imagine reading this as a black man?

    It's just the same...

    > It's a bit hard to not assume everyone is able bodied if
    > we aren't allowed to even NOTICE disabilities!!!

    I never asked you not to "notice", instead only:

    a) Not to label, just like "differently coloured persons"
    b) Not to segregate, just like "us whites"


    Hmmm .... I am quite confused about some of the issues mentioned and the language used here. Maybe you can help me out.

    But before I address my confusion: let me state clearly here that I am totally opposed against jokes or satire which make use of a person's (or group of persons) medical conditions, mental conditions, skin pigmentation, gender etc. to make their point. Doing so is just savage .... We are all better than that (I fervently hope so).

    Now to my points:

    1.) There is obviously a great sensitivity as to the correct language vocabulary when addressing the issue of handicapped people - including the use of the term "handicapped". AFAIK (and I am not a native english speaker), the term "handicapped" translates directly into the corresponding german term "behindert" (yes - I am german) and as far as I can remember language lessons in school, "handicapped" was a correct translation for "behindert" and the correct term to describe people with disabilities. Pls correct me if am wrong.

    2.) You guys talk about labeling and segregrating groups of people through use of language. Obviously, it is correct to label certain groups of people like for example "men" and "women" - if we did not do that then there would not these handy places convienent places labelled "gents" and "ladies" in public places. Other labels are of course offensive - the most offensive example I can think of comes right from my people's history: "Juedische Untermenschen" and "Arier" - I think you all can understand that even without understanding german - the mindset behind that one caused the death of more than six millions jews and countless other persons back in world war 2. The point I am trying to make now is that labeling people is what we humans do - it is part of basic human nature. We do it all the time and the behaviour as such has not significantly throughout human history - in this point we are all still savage.

    3.) As I am writing this my colleague (a civil engineer & architect) is reading over my shoulder and told me that he constantly has to think about the needs of physically handicapped people when designing his projects and that to him not addressing the needs of that specific group of people in terms of physical accessibility is simply unacceptable. And he this talking about this issue all the time when presenting his desgns to his principals .... so for myself it is again obvious that is impossible not to address the needs and issues concerning handicapped people without identifying and labeling them as a group.



  • cklam 2007-05-24 00:20
    me:
    It's a basic rule of the internet - no matter how obvious you make the sarcasm, someone will take it seriously :D


    And that is why Alex needs to sit down and implement a [sarcasm][/sarcasm] for the BBCODE used on this site ...
  • cklam 2007-05-24 01:34
    Rich:
    Gsquared:
    For example, in a discussion of sunburn, the statement, "pale skin, like that possessed by caucasians, is more succeptible to sunburn than more heavily melinized skin, such as that possed by people of color, and thus requires a higher SPF sunscreen to be safe".


    What I find offensive is the implication that I am a person without color.

    Rich


    <sarcasm>Rich - you got a colour: pale.</sarcasm>

    As for the SPF thingy:

    1.) There is one exception: Infants and young children with dark sking pigmentation still require the same (very high) SPF's as similar kids with pale skin pigmentation due to the fact that kids in these age groups do deal well with UV due to their biological development stage at these age groups.

    2.) Regardless of your skin pigmentation exposing yourself to UV radiation will give you a tan (hopefully not a sunburn). If your skin pigmentation is dark to begin with, you will just become darker .....

    3.) A certain amount of UV radiation is required to keep your body healthy (for infants/toddlers: the vitamin D issue). Check on Wikipedia.
  • bif 2007-05-24 01:44
    cyclops:
    Am I the only one who thought the phrase "As long as we, the majority, can access content, that’s all that really matters." was sarcasm in the context it was used?


    I just recently became disabled, although not in a way that prevents me to use computer technology, and I can say that I was not the least bit offended by the OBVIOUS sarcasm of this article.

    As a developer of software and websites, I know first-hand how little thought accessibility is given by software developers and management. It's not usually until a nice big lucrative government contract is looming that companies scramble to make their software accessible in the most minimal way.

    The article was pure sarcasm, and anyone claiming to be offended is trolling, stupid, or both.
  • Noah Slater 2007-05-24 03:09
    > the mindset behind that one caused the death of more than six millions jews and countless other persons back in world war 2.

    Well, well... I have enjoyed watching you all fall over your self to prove just how wrong I am. I hasten to point out that I actually retracted my main argument. Guess it pays to read before you comment.

    Either way... I'm calling Godwin's Law on this one.

    So long, and thanks for all the fish.
  • s 2007-05-24 03:32
    Martijn van Zal:
    I once saw a site where they did all their hyper links in <a href="#" onclick="document.location='foo.html'">Bar</a> style :)


    I once saw a site where every single link was a separate Java applet. With function of "rollover" (change background image under the text).
  • s 2007-05-24 03:34
    Noah Slater:
    The term "differently abled" is offensive to me as a disabled person, as is your assumption that all of your readers are able bodied.

    I am a disabled person and I read your site - please don't refer to me as if:

    a) I am "different" is some way
    b) I should not be reading your site due to my disablement


    You're a touchy jerk giving a bad name to all disabled people.
    captcha: stinky.
  • Thany 2007-05-24 03:58
    Noah Slater:
    a) I am "different" is some way
    b) I should not be reading your site due to my disablement


    Sorry, but I just *need* to reply here. I don't mean any disrespect, but, uhm, different doesn't mean anything negative. It's actually a more respectful way of saying you've got something going than saying you're disabled (obviously you're not, because then you wouldn't be able to do anything, right?). And how can you be not different from when you are disabled and I am not? In my country, the literal translation of a disabled person is "invalid" or "less valid"...

    Don't know about you, but I'd be offended by that for sure ;)
  • SteveBosman 2007-05-24 05:48
    codeman38:

    Even more oddly, on the Russian site, "сс" is converted into "B". There are several "nedelya klaBiki" posts. Not sure what sort of weird round-trip transliteration is going on here!

    Russian "c" translates to Western "s" and we already know "ss" is being converted to "B". So "сс" --> "ss" --> "B"
  • Pilum 2007-05-24 07:24
    W:
    Monkios:
    Eulbobo:
    One of the "first" recommendations for accessibility is the possibility for a website to work without javascript enabled.

    Good try, but it's hard to beat the habits


    The target attribute isn't included in the anchor element in strict XHTML.

    You can do what this guy did or you can change the DTD for your website to allow the target attribute. Most web developper don't know this.

    Or you can fuck off with the popups and use a regular link.


    Ok, to all you web n00bs, here's how it's done:

    <a href="<a href="../accessibility.htm" onclick="popup(this.href); return false;">Accessibility</a>

    Popup and regular link rolled into one. Accessibility and the proper way to do it - "javascript:" is a relic from before the days of event handlers.
  • Pilum 2007-05-24 07:24
    (And I managed to mess that one up, of course :P)
  • The real wtf fool 2007-05-24 08:40
    Noah Slater:

    Well, well... I have enjoyed watching you all fall over your self to prove just how wrong I am. I hasten to point out that I actually retracted my main argument.


    Please engage brain before commencing typing in future.
  • KattMan 2007-05-24 11:15
    Rich:
    Gsquared:
    For example, in a discussion of sunburn, the statement, "pale skin, like that possessed by caucasians, is more succeptible to sunburn than more heavily melinized skin, such as that possed by people of color, and thus requires a higher SPF sunscreen to be safe".


    What I find offensive is the implication that I am a person without color.

    Rich

    I think a street comic said it best before...

    "People call us colored? When I get up in the morning I'm brown. When I get mad, I'm brown. When I get sick, I'm brown. When I die I'll still be brown.
    You others though, when you get up in the morning you are pink. When you get mad your are red. When you get sick you are green. When you die you will be gray. You are the colored people!"
  • codeman38 2007-05-24 12:12
    SteveBosman:
    Russian "c" translates to Western "s" and we already know "ss" is being converted to "B". So "сс" --> "ss" --> "B"

    Yeah, I realized that... it just seemed strange that the conversion is happening in what seems to be two passes. I guess why I was thinking 'round-trip' was that, since the Cyrillic was already being transliterated, it doesn't seem like it should be going through a second layer of processing once it's been Romanized.
  • Hunter Thomas 2007-05-24 12:45
    You sir, do not understand the joke. The portion you quote was obviously a tongue in cheek reference to how most people treat website design.

    Yes, this is a sadly common and prevalent view. That doesn't mean the author is unaware or supportive of it. You are to up tight. My wife (who has a neuro-muscular motor impairment) and one of my best friends (who is blind, and the best sysadmin I know) laugh at people who get this up tight about accessibility.

    This site is for poking fun of how badly the intent of the architects can get mangled when people with interest in perverting the tech (usually for money, one way or another) get their hands on it.

    This site is not your pulpit for fixing how people view accessible design.

    Your comments are the equivalent of walking into a church, and yelling at people that they need to read the bible and follow god harder.
  • Hunter Thomas 2007-05-24 12:47
    [quote="Noah Slater"]
    No, you are right - it wasn't his major point, the objectionable language was used seriously.

    I quote:

    "As long as we, the majority, can access content, that’s all that really matters."

    How would this make you feel as a disabled reader? Alienated? Maybe you will reply "no" but the fact of the matter is that this language distances this site from disabled readers.

    It's subtle, but it's important.
    [/quote]

    [quote user="Hunter Thomas"]You sir, do not understand the joke. The portion you quote was obviously a tongue in cheek reference to how most people treat website design.

    Yes, this is a sadly common and prevalent view. That doesn't mean the author is unaware or supportive of it. You are to up tight. My wife (who has a neuro-muscular motor impairment) and one of my best friends (who is blind, and the best sysadmin I know) laugh at people who get this up tight about accessibility.

    This site is for poking fun of how badly the intent of the architects can get mangled when people with interest in perverting the tech (usually for money, one way or another) get their hands on it.

    This site is not your pulpit for fixing how people view accessible design.

    Your comments are the equivalent of walking into a church, and yelling at people that they need to read the bible and follow god harder.[/quote]

    Crap, the post I was quoting originally didn't make it. Bastards. Fixed.
  • Marc 2007-05-24 14:22
    <i>I once saw a site where they did all their hyper links in <a href="#" onclick="document.location='foo.html'">Bar</a> style :)</i>

    I once *worked* at a place where the head of our IT department had a site full of links like that. When I criticized it and asked why he didn't use plain HTML links that simply 'always work', his answer was "because at the time the site was built it was a better solution". The real reason, of course, was that he copy-pasted the links from somewhere else because he couldn't write code worth sh*t himself. His management skills were also nonexistent. Except for how he manged to compensated for his lack of competence by ass licking.
  • No one 2007-05-24 16:03
    YOU ARE ALL DISABLED. There is also no title attribute on the link, so screen readers are out. The Javascript is secondary.
  • Wilmer 2007-05-24 16:21
    Agreed. If one really wants popups with specific window sizes/properties, then I think this:

    <a href="blah.html" target="annoyingpopup" onclick="window.new('annoyingpopup',blah,blah)">Blah</a>

    is the best solution. The downside is that it uses a name, so other links will open in the same window. I'm sure the JS syntax is incorrect, I never use JS. :-)
  • pgaule 2007-05-24 18:12
    Noah Slater:

    Anyway, what attitude are you speaking of? Should I be afraid to voice my opinion in case YOU don't like it?


    You should be afraid of voicing your opinion because it makes you look like an idiot.
  • Jon 2007-05-24 18:26
    Pilum:
    (And I managed to mess that one up, of course :P)
    I'll say. It still has an onclick event. Can't we all agree that auto-spawning popups is the real WTF?
  • Andrew 2007-05-24 20:05
    Over 100 comments and no one seems to understand standards.

    <a href="foo.html" title="Foo!" class="popup">Foo</a>


    You can then use JS to make that link popup. But you need the damn title, and the href, otherwise a link it is not.

    Every time I have seen accessibility discussed on mainstream sites this is the kind of bullshit I have seen.

    If you are disabled, the internet can be a very useful tool, why unnecessarily make it more difficult for all of us to use? Accessibility is for everyone.
  • Anonymous 2007-05-24 22:06
    dolo54:
    Plus, exactly term would you prefer? "Handy-capable"??? Plenty of black people I know have said that the term "people of color" is fairly offensive in that it sounds pretty much like "colored" where as "black" is totally fine with them.

    I find "people of colour" not offensive, but ridiculous instead.

    Are there _colourless_ people? I've never seen one or heard of any, except in sci-fi's featuring "invisible man".

    All real people have skin colour. White is itself a proper colour, too!
  • Anonymous 2007-05-24 22:15
    Michael Buschbeck:

    There is no trivial mapping of "ss" to "ß" in German. We do use double-s in our language; "ß" is a distinct character, even though it's occasionally transcribed as "ss" where the "ß" letter isn't available (in plain ASCII, for example).

    "Occasionally"? Which "we" are you talking about? The Swiss always use "ss" instead of "ß". Always. They have got rid of das scharfe S for decades since a spelling reform, and the world (or the country) hasn't collapsed because of it. Further, when capitalizing, "ß" always becomes "SS" (or "SZ" in some regions). Some people do keep using "ß" in all-caps signs, but that's non-standard.

    These make the 1996 German spelling reform ridiculous in keeping the "ß" in Germany and Austria. The Swiss can live without it. So, why can't "we"?

  • Anonymous 2007-05-24 22:17
    Lucas Goodwin:
    On topic:

    Popups are just bad design even with-out the added irony of putting a pop-up link on the term accessibility.

    I'll never understand why designers try to make webpages behave like client apps.

    Just because... they can! (Not that they should.)
  • Anonymous 2007-05-24 22:34
    Gsquared:
    And yet again, the language is crippled by someone who just plain doesn't understand the words. "Dis" = not, against, missing; "ability" = a capacity or skill to accomplish or do something. Thus, "disability" simply means "lacking a skill or capacity to accomplish something". Is a blind person "disabled"? Well, he/she does not have the capacity to see, ipso, he/she is "dis"-"able" to see, ipso, "disabled". Same for someone lacking legs = lacking the abilities for which legs are necessary = disabled.

    Is that a pejorative or insulting term? Not at all. It expresses a simple fact.

    I can't agree more!

    Indeed, I hate those who complain that these words are offensive. These complainers are usually sufferers of inferiority complex, IMHO. They want to attract attention, which they need and lack. They feel they're ignored. So, they invent something to complain about. "Disabled" is a normal word. They invent a new, pejorative interpretation to it, so that they can complain (at the expense of crippling our language). Then, they impose this interpretation on others to raise attention.

    The same thing goes for words like "man" (for mankind) and "he" (when being non-specific on gender and hence may refer a person of any sex). The feminists want to raise attention. So, they invented something to complain: "man" is to be interpreted as *only* referring to male homo sapiens. So, "_Man_ is not born evil" now becomes a sexist statement, as it doesn't talk about women! And "Everyone should try _his_ best" is considered sexist, too, because the new interpretation excludes female homo sapiens. You now have to say, clumsily, "Everyone should try his/her best". Some people are now using "they" singularly instead of "he/she" to make it less clumsy, but this cause confusion between singular and plural 3rd person pronouns. That's language pollution! The root cause boils down to the feminists who invented something to complain about.


    So, minorities, please stop inventing something to complain about. Most of the time, I've found that it's not the majority discriminating against you. Rather, it is you yourselves who are discriminating against yourselves. And you wrongly assume that the majority are discriminating against yourselves like you do. That's inferiority complex.
  • Anonymous 2007-05-24 22:51
    cklam:

    1.) There is obviously a great sensitivity as to the correct language vocabulary when addressing the issue of handicapped people - including the use of the term "handicapped". AFAIK (and I am not a native english speaker), the term "handicapped" translates directly into the corresponding german term "behindert" (yes - I am german) and as far as I can remember language lessons in school, "handicapped" was a correct translation for "behindert" and the correct term to describe people with disabilities. Pls correct me if am wrong.

    Yes, you're right. Originally, the word has no negative meaning.

    But some people -- usually those suffering from inferiority complex -- invented a new interpretation of it, making it negative, thus forcing you to use other words. As a result, some people invented "differently-abled". "different" is neutral. "abled" is even positive. So, this term should be OK? No. Noah here has just demonstrated what I said: he invented a new, pejorative interpretation of this term (or even of "different") to complain about. He finds "being different" offensive, too, doesn't he? (I don't. I'm not handicapped, but I'm proud to say I'm *different* from you all. I'm unique in this world. [/b]I am who I am.[/b] My DNA is unique and hence different from you all. Why is being different such a bad thing? I can't understand.)

    The same thing happens in German, too. Originally, "die Mitarbeiter" is a plural form for "colleagues", which can include both male and female colleagues. There is another word "die Mitarbeiterinnen" which refers female colleagues only. (There is no specific form to refer to male colleagues only. So, indeed, the male sex is discriminated!) But at some point in history, the feminists invented a new interpretation, which has been unfortunately accepted by the main stream: "die Mitarbeiter" should not be gender-neutral; rather, it refers to male colleagues only. So, nowadays, in official letters, people are forced to write "die Mitarbeiter/Mitarbeiterinnen" instead of the more concise "die Mitarbeiter". Some people find that clumsy and shorten it to "die Mitarbeiter/innen". But the "/" doesn't look good within a word. So, some advocate writing "die MitarbeiterInnen" instead. But, this still doesn't solve one problem: how are you going to pronounce this? Doesn't it sound like "die Mitarbeiterinnen"?

    A series of problems arise from this new (mis-)interpretation of the originally gender-neutral word "die Mitarbeiter". And the root cause boils down to some feminists, having nothing better to do to kill time, invented something just to complain about. Sigh... an originally valid, concise and non-discriminating expression "die Mitarbeiter" is ruined and replaced by something clumsy. Sigh...

  • cklam 2007-05-27 00:35
    Anonymous:
    cklam:

    1.) There is obviously a great sensitivity as to the correct language vocabulary when addressing the issue of handicapped people - including the use of the term "handicapped". AFAIK (and I am not a native english speaker), the term "handicapped" translates directly into the corresponding german term "behindert" (yes - I am german) and as far as I can remember language lessons in school, "handicapped" was a correct translation for "behindert" and the correct term to describe people with disabilities. Pls correct me if am wrong.

    Yes, you're right. Originally, the word has no negative meaning.

    But some people -- usually those suffering from inferiority complex -- invented a new interpretation of it, making it negative, thus forcing you to use other words. As a result, some people invented "differently-abled". "different" is neutral. "abled" is even positive. So, this term should be OK? No. Noah here has just demonstrated what I said: he invented a new, pejorative interpretation of this term (or even of "different") to complain about. He finds "being different" offensive, too, doesn't he? (I don't. I'm not handicapped, but I'm proud to say I'm *different* from you all. I'm unique in this world. [/b]I am who I am.[/b] My DNA is unique and hence different from you all. Why is being different such a bad thing? I can't understand.)

    The same thing happens in German, too. Originally, "die Mitarbeiter" is a plural form for "colleagues", which can include both male and female colleagues. There is another word "die Mitarbeiterinnen" which refers female colleagues only. (There is no specific form to refer to male colleagues only. So, indeed, the male sex is discriminated!) But at some point in history, the feminists invented a new interpretation, which has been unfortunately accepted by the main stream: "die Mitarbeiter" should not be gender-neutral; rather, it refers to male colleagues only. So, nowadays, in official letters, people are forced to write "die Mitarbeiter/Mitarbeiterinnen" instead of the more concise "die Mitarbeiter". Some people find that clumsy and shorten it to "die Mitarbeiter/innen". But the "/" doesn't look good within a word. So, some advocate writing "die MitarbeiterInnen" instead. But, this still doesn't solve one problem: how are you going to pronounce this? Doesn't it sound like "die Mitarbeiterinnen"?

    A series of problems arise from this new (mis-)interpretation of the originally gender-neutral word "die Mitarbeiter". And the root cause boils down to some feminists, having nothing better to do to kill time, invented something just to complain about. Sigh... an originally valid, concise and non-discriminating expression "die Mitarbeiter" is ruined and replaced by something clumsy. Sigh...



    I remember way back from my university time (late80-ties/early 90-ties) a lot of people using the form "MitarbeiterInnen" as a shorthand for the above (in really official documents, too). And this is not mentioned in the "Duden" (at least the last time I looked) - more is the wonder (almost all universities/colleges in Germany are government-"owned" and run like government organizations).

    So the feminist lobby at my university forced the adoption of unapproved languages changes into official documents. If you do not know Germany you can not imagine the significance of something like this actually happening.

    (Problably german readers only:) I leave it up to you to guess the name of the univeristy involved.
  • Amadan 2007-05-28 13:23
    [quote user=cklam]2.) You guys talk about labeling and segregrating groups of people through use of language. Obviously, it is correct to label certain groups of people like for example "men" and "women" - if we did not do that then there would not these handy places convienent places labelled "gents" and "ladies" in public places. Other labels are of course offensive - the most offensive example I can think of comes right from my people's history: "Juedische Untermenschen" and "Arier" - I think you all can understand that even without understanding german - the mindset behind that one caused the death of more than six millions jews and countless other persons back in world war 2. The point I am trying to make now is that labeling people is what we humans do - it is part of basic human nature. We do it all the time and the behaviour as such has not significantly throughout human history - in this point we are all still savage.[/quote]

    Hmm. In principle, I agree with everything you said. My inner nitpicker, though, has this to say:

    Labeling is what we humans do. It is otherwise customarily known as language. Labeling a certain type of animal with a sound "cat" (and its graphical equivalent) allows us to talk about our feline friends with other fans of that rather unique species. Talking about labeling itself would be difficult without the label "labeling" that we attach to the process I am now discussing. Etc, etc... So labeling itself is surely not bad - or particularly "savage".

    The important thing here is the difference between the intrinsically offensive labels ("Juedische Untermenschen"), which explicitly qualify something as having low quality, and extrinsic ones, that start out as innocuously descriptive and factual expressions and receive its "offensive meaning" by misinterpretation by overly sensitive people. Real offense vs. perceived offense.

    I am not American, and I was always quite shocked by the high linguistic tension over there. Once in a convention held in a venue that had a "Black Room" - and we were told by an American that it was simply unacceptable! But the room was indeed painted black (and contrasted with White Room and Grey Room), and we had no idea what else we would call it...

    The savage thing is, by my understanding, almost never the labels themselves - but the atrocious actions humans can, for some reason, be inspired to by them.
  • Jenda 2007-05-29 06:44
    codeman38:
    Even more oddly, on the Russian site, "сс" is converted into "B". There are several "nedelya klaBiki" posts. Not sure what sort of weird round-trip transliteration is going on here!


    Well, any attempt to transliterate Russian so that the english speaking people would pronounce anything even remotely related to the original is bound to fail. You can't consistently transliterate to a language with no pronunciation rules. Or rather with several sets of coliding rulesets and thousands of exceptions from any of those.

    You can fairly easily transliterate Russian so that Czechs will read it almost exactly right (after you tell them to read "y" and "i" differently - no need to explain how and if you use one additional accentated character all czechs know from Slovak). With English all bets are off.

    OTOH, when it comes to grammar English is nice, simple and logical. Czech is ... erm ... complex. (I will sing, you will sing, he will sing, we will sing, you will sing, they will sing vs. ja budu zpivat, ty budes zpivat, on bude zpivat, my budeme zpivat, vy budete zpivat, oni budou zpivat or ja zazpivam, ty zazpivas, on zazpiva, my zazpivame, vy zazpivate, oni zazpivaji. And the meaning is a wee bit different and some verbs only use the first style, while others only the second and there are tens of different prefixes that sometimes signify future and sometimes don't and sometimes it even depends on context whether it's future or ability or ... It's a mess.)

    BTW, why do think there should be "cc"?
  • Jenda 2007-05-29 07:34
    Monkios:

    The target attribute isn't included in the anchor element in strict XHTML.

    You can do what this guy did or you can change the DTD for your website to allow the target attribute. Most web developper don't know this.


    How come this doesn't surprise me. The HTML standars are full of WTFs. "If it works, ban it" seems to be the moto.
  • James Craig 2007-05-30 18:49
    Or you can set the target via JavaScript and have the best of both. Or you can write a return value for custom popup function. You can do this any number of ways in strict XHTML.

    PS. The captcha on this comment isn't accessible, either. WTF?
  • 855 2008-11-28 21:23
    衢州货架
    余杭货架
    萧山货架
    临安货架
    嘉善货架
    海宁货架
    桐乡货架
    奉化货架
    余姚货架
    慈溪货架
    上虞货架
    诸暨货架
    舟山货架
    苏州货架
    南通货架
    扬州货架
    盐城货架
    徐州货架
    淮阴货架
    常州货架
    常熟货架
    丹阳货架
    金坛货架
    仪征货架
    泰州货架
    昆山货架
    吴江货架
    太仓货架
    句容货架
    安徽货架
    上海货架
    浙江货架
    杭州货架
    轻型货架
    南京货架
    镇江货架
    中型货架
    重型货架
    模具货架
    悬臂货架
    金华货架
    温州货架
    台州货架
    绍兴货架
    立体库货架
    苏州仓储笼
    无锡仓储笼
    料箱
    工业货架
    下沙货架
    丹阳货架
    东营货架
    舟山货架
    临安货架
    海宁货架
    温岭货架
    义乌货架
    诸暨货架
    慈溪货架
    余姚货架
    镇江货架
    南通货架
    苏州货架
    扬州货架
    盐城货架
    徐州货架
    淮阴货架
    连云港货架
    常州货架
    无锡货架
    江阴货架
    上海货架
    浙江货架
    杭州货架
    湖州货架
    嘉兴货架
    宁波货架
    余杭货架
    萧山货架
    衢州货架
    轻型货架
    安徽货架
    常州货架
    巢湖货架
    慈溪货架
    丹阳货架
    东营货架
    海宁货架
    杭州货架
    合肥货架
    湖州货架
    淮阴货架
    嘉兴货架
    江阴货架
    轻型货架
    中型货架
    重型货架
    悬臂货架
    模具货架
    余杭货架
    萧山货架
    临安货架
    平湖货架
    海宁货架
    余姚货架
    慈溪货架
    诸暨货架
    舟山货架
    瑞安货架
    义乌货架
    青田货架
    台州货架
    奉化货架
    衢州货架
    上海货架
    嘉善货架
    温岭货架
    建德货架
    上虞货架
    青岛货架
    安徽货架
    合肥货架
    芜湖货架
    马鞍山货架
    宣城货架
    巢湖货架
    杭州货架
    湖州货架
    西安货架
    洛阳货架
    威海货架
    淮南货架
    铜陵货架
    浙江货架
    嘉兴货架
    宁波货架
    绍兴货架
    温州货架
    金华货架
    苏州货架
    南通货架
    扬州货架
    盐城货架
    徐州货架
    淮阴货架
    连云港货架
    常州货架
    无锡货架
    常熟货架
    张家港货架
    江阴货架
    昆山货架
    湖北货架
    四川货架
    武汉货架
    陕西货架
    河南货架
    山东货架
    济南货架
    轻型货架
    中型货架
    重型货架
    悬臂货架
    模具货架
    南京货架
    镇江货架
    台州货架
    温州货架
    金华货架
    衢州货架
    义乌货架
    诸暨货架
    海宁货架
    萧山货架
    慈溪货架
    嘉善货架
    舟山货架
    奉化货架
    平湖货架
    余姚货架
    温岭货架
    张家港货架
    安徽货架
    吴江货架
    昆山货架
    太仓货架
    泰州货架
    仪征货架
    句容货架
    上海货架
    浙江货架
    杭州货架
    湖州货架
    嘉兴货架
    绍兴货架
    宁波货架
    南京货架
    镇江货架
    苏州货架
    南通货架
    扬州货架
    徐州货架
    淮阴货架
    连云港货架
    常州货架
    江阴货架
    无锡货架
    常熟货架
    金坛货架
    轻型货架
    宣城货架
    铜陵货架
    巢湖货架
    马鞍山货架
    合肥货架
    芜湖货架
    阁楼货架
    悬臂货架
    重型货架
    中型货架
    模具货架
    中型货架
    轻型货架
    中型货架
    重型货架
    悬臂货架
    模具货架
    南京货架
    镇江货架
    苏州货架
    扬州货架
    南通货架
    徐州货架
    盐城货架
    淮阴货架
    常州货架
    合肥货架
    芜湖货架
    马鞍山货架
    铜陵货架
    宣城货架
    巢湖货架
    江阴货架
    张家港货架
    义乌货架
    临安货架
    路桥货架
    东营货架
    重型货架
    悬臂货架
    模具货架
    温岭货架
    阁楼货架
    不锈钢管
    不锈钢管
    不锈钢管
    不锈钢管
    不锈钢管
    不锈钢管
    不锈钢管
    不锈钢管
    不锈钢管
    不锈钢管
    不锈钢管
    不锈钢管
    不锈钢管
    不锈钢管
    小游戏
    激情电影
    美容BB霜免费赠送
    英语天地
    手机游戏下载

    设计之家
    美容时尚网
    美食在线
    <p>安徽货架
    台州货架
    温州货架
    金华货架
    衢州货架
    海宁货架
    萧山货架
    余杭货架
    慈溪货架
    余姚货架
    诸暨货架
    连云港货架
    常州货架
    无锡货架
    上海货架
    浙江货架
    杭州货架
    湖州货架
    嘉兴货架
    宁波货架
    绍兴货架
    中型货架
    苏州货架
    南京货架
    上海货架
    镇江货架
    苏州货架
    扬州货架
    盐城货架
    徐州货架
    淮阴货架
    轻型货架
    常州货架
    诸暨货架
    义乌货架
    慈溪货架
    余杭货架
    金华货架
    萧山货架
    余姚货架
    衢州货架
    海宁货架
    平湖货架
    舟山货架
    临安货架
    常熟货架
    东营货架
    无锡货架
    温岭货架
    瑞安货架
    丹阳货架
    桐乡货架
    仓库货架
    轻型货架
    中型货架
    重型货架
    悬臂货架
    模具货架
    南京货架
    镇江货架
    苏州货架
    南通货架
    扬州货架
    盐城货架
    徐州货架
    淮阴货架
    连云港货架
    常州货架
    江阴货架
    上海货架
    张家港货架
    浙江货架
    杭州货架
    嘉兴货架
    湖州货架
    宁波货架
    绍兴货架
    台州货架
    昆山货架
    温岭货架
    悬臂货架
    重型货架
    中型货架
    模具货架
    苏州货架
    常州货架
    无锡货架
    杭州货架
    浙江货架
    南京货架
    上海货架
    江阴货架
    宁波货架
    萧山货架
    诸暨货架
    南通货架
    台州货架
    阁楼货架
    汽车4S店货架
    温州货架
    轻型货架
    火箭队
    火箭队
    火箭队
    火箭队
    火箭队
    京沪高铁
    火箭队
    火箭队
    证券
    巢湖货架
    芜湖货架
    铜陵货架
    合肥货架
    马鞍山货架
    安徽货架
    路桥货架
    东营货架
    温岭货架
    余杭货架
    临安货架
    慈溪货架
    余姚货架
    萧山货架
    宁海货架
    义乌货架
    海宁货架
    诸暨货架
    衢州货架
    金华货架
    温州货架
    台州货架
    绍兴货架
    宁波货架
    嘉兴货架
    浙江货架
    湖州货架
    上海货架
    杭州货架
    丹阳货架
    仪征货架
    张家港货架
    江阴货架
    轻型货架
    中型货架
    重型货架
    南京货架
    悬臂货架
    镇江货架
    苏州货架
    南通货架
    常州货架
    江阴货架
    浙江货架
    杭州货架
    上海货架
    宁波货架
    诸暨货架
    义乌货架
    昆山货架
    嘉兴货架
    萧山货架
    常熟货架
    无锡货架
    马鞍山货架
    海宁货架
    台州货架
    温州货架
    模具货架
    平湖货架
    盐城货架
    扬州货架
    南通货架
    镇江货架
    南京货架
    浙江货架
    徐州货架
    台州货架
    南通货架
    芜湖货架
    无锡货架
    苏州货架
    南通货架
    扬州货架
    徐州货架
    淮阴货架
    连云港货架
    常州货架
    昆山货架
    上海货架
    马鞍山货架
    安徽货架
    泰州货架
    温州货架
    海宁货架
    湖州货架
    金华货架
    华德货架
    新众亚货架
    固德货架
    镇江货架
    南京货架
    阁楼货架
    模具货架
    悬臂货架
    重型货架
    中型货架
    轻型货架
    无锡货架
    阁楼货架
    模具货架
    悬臂货架
    重型货架
    中型货架
    轻型货架
    张家港货架
    潍坊电晕处理机
    货架
    北京货架
    货架
    货架
    广州货架
    北京货架厂
    货架厂
    上海货架
    深圳货架
    苏州货架
    无锡货架
    货架公司
    库房货架
    北京仓储货架
    苏州货架
    货架公司
    天津货架
    宁波货架
    货架网
    青岛货架
    中国货架网
    山东货架
    厦门货架
    大昌货架
    仓库货架
    中型货架
    广州货架厂
    东莞货架
    东莞货架
    货架寿命
    模具货架
    求购货架
    济南货架
    轻型货架
    角钢货架
    大连货架
    大连货架
    重型货架
    杰达货架
    哈尔滨货架
    北京超市货架
    图书货架
    货架价格
    货架价格
    托盘货架
    石家庄货架
    北京超市货架
    货架价格
    托盘货架
    石家庄货架
    货架配件
    北京仓储货架厂
    重庆货架
    阁楼货架
    兴达货架
    六维货架
    仓储货架公司
    立体货架
    金属货架
    安徽货架
    水晶货架
    长春货架
    辉煌货架
    深圳货架厂
    重力式货架
    佛山货架厂
    爱维斯货架
    货架子
    货架子
    富源货架
    货架图
    移动货架
    货架类型
    杭州货架
    货架制造
    托盘
    塑料托盘
    木托盘
    铁托盘
    塑木托盘
    仓储笼
    仓储笼制造
    折叠式仓储笼
    巧固架
    堆垛架
    手推车
    铁板手推车
    不锈钢手推车
    登高车
    挂板架
    置物架
    置物架
    置物架
    料箱
    钢制料箱
    料箱
    物流台车
    载物台车
    物流台车
    南京货架
    南京货架
    南京货架
    苏州货架
    无锡货架
    徐州货架
    常州货架
    镇江货架
    连云港货架
    淮阴货架
    盐城货架
    南通货架
    昆山货架
    张家港货架
    宜兴货架
    江阴货架
    淮安货架
    常熟货架
    泰兴货架
    吴江货架
    太仓货架
    滨海货架
    金湖货架
    靖江货架
    江苏货架
    杭州货架
    杭州货架
    温州货架
    宁波货架
    绍兴市货架
    湖州货架
    嘉兴货架
    临海货架
    金华货架
    台州货架
    义务货架
    温岭货架
    舟山货架
    舟山货架
    永康货架
    兰溪货架
    宁海货架
    富阳货架
    宁海货架
    宁海货架
    龙泉货架
    德清货架
    松阳货架
    长兴货架
    永嘉货架
    海宁货架
    山东货架
    青岛货架
    济南货架
    聊城货架
    德州货架
    东营货架
    潍坊货架
    日照货架
    成都货架
    绵阳货架
    上海货架
    南京货架
    北京货架
    上海货架
    温州货架
    浙江货架
    苏州货架
    杭州货架
    扬州货架
    无锡货架
    无锡货架
    张家港货架
    山东货架
    辽宁货架
    江苏货架
    广州货架
    广东货架
    深圳货架
    中山货架
    佛山货架
    东莞货架
    江门货架
    惠州货架
    江西货架
    安徽货架
    合肥货架
    昆明货架
    新疆货架
    河北货架
    湖南货架
    货架
    云南货架
    云南货架
    四川货架
    成都货架
    重庆货架
    成都货架
    重庆货架
    郑州货架
    大连货架
    芜湖货架
    济南货架
    部队货架
    仓库货架
    工业货架
    手推车
    整理架
    折叠式料箱
    货架
    南京货架
    浙江货架
    南京货架
    镇江货架
    苏州货架
    南通货架
    扬州货架
    扬州货架
    盐城货架
    徐州货架
    淮阴货架
    连云港货架
    常州货架
    无锡货架
    丹阳货架
    扬中货架
    金坛货架
    溧阳货架
    常熟货架
    张家港货架
    吴江货架
    昆山货架
    太仓货架
    启东货架
    海安货架
    泰州货架
    江都货架
    仪征货架
    句容货架
    浙江货架
    杭州货架
    湖州货架
    嘉兴货架
    宁波货架
    绍兴货架
    台州货架
    温州货架
    丽水货架
    金华货架
    衢州货架
    余杭货架
    萧山货架
    富阳货架
    临安货架
    德清货架
    嘉善货架
    平湖货架
    海宁货架
    青田货架
    宁海货架
    奉化货架
    余姚货架
    慈溪货架
    诸暨货架
    瑞安货架
    义乌货架
    舟山货架
    下沙货架
    下沙货架
    下沙货架
    上虞货架
    路桥货架
    建德货架
    永嘉货架
    岱山货架
    桐乡货架
    江苏货架
    南京货架
    镇江货架
    苏州货架
    南通货架
    扬州货架
    盐城货架
    徐州货架
    淮阴货架
    连云港货架
    常州货架
    无锡货架
    丹阳货架
    扬中货架
    金坛货架
    常熟货架
    张家港货架
    江阴货架
    吴江货架
    昆山货架
    太仓货架
    泰州货架
    上海货架
    江都货架
    仪征货架
    浙江货架
    杭州货架
    湖州货架
    嘉兴货架
    宁波货架
    绍兴货架
    台州货架
    温州货架
  • wholesale jordan shoes 2008-12-22 22:38
    Air Jordan wholesale adidas shoesAir JordanAir Jordan
    Air JordanAir Jordans wholesale adidas shoes
    Air JordanAir JordanNike shoesAir Jordanair jordan nike
    Buy jordan shoesAir Jordan Air JordanAir Jordanjordan shoeAir Jordan
    air jordan nikewholesale adidas shoes
    Air Jordanretro air jordanswholesale adidas shoes
  • runescape gold 2011-05-06 01:08