Thread Subject: Re: Bypassing content.

Note

This archival content is maintained by WebAIM and NCDAE on behalf of TEITAC and the U.S. Access Board . Additional details on the updates to section 508 and section 255 can be found at the Access Board web site.

From: Andrew Kirkpatrick
Date: Mon, Jun 11 2007 8:45 AM

Allen,
Some methods to meet this requirement might not be visible - for
example, providing a heading structure that allows users to navigate to
different areas of the content. I don't think that we should be think
just about "skip navigation" links.

AWK

> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf
> Of Hoffman, Allen
> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 9:33 AM
> To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
> Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] Bypassing content.
>
> Something we have missed in our language is that the method
> must also be visible. This is so often overlooked, or
> intentionally not wanted that it MUST be said.
>
>
>
>
> Allen Hoffman -- = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; v: 202-447-0303
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf
> Of Travis Roth
> Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 6:49 PM
> To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; 'TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee'
> Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] Bypassing content.
>
> The skipping of groups of links, such as navigational links,
> is also beneficial to other keyboard users who cannot use a
> mouse but also do not use a screen reader.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf
> Of Sailesh Panchang
> Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 2:02 PM
> To: 'TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee'
> Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] Bypassing content.
>
>
> This requirement is primarily designed to help users of
> screen reading software.
> User agents including assistive technologies provide ability
> to jump to different elements (eg. lists, tables, frames,) on
> a page if structural markup is used. Structural markup for
> tables, headings lists, etc. is required by Para (g) under
> 6.1 that reads "Information and relationships conveyed
> through presentation shall be programmatically determinable,
> and notification of changes to these is available to...". So
> using structural markup facilitates AT to skip over blocks /
> skip to desired block.
> Therefore I believe the skip block requirement being debated
> over predominantly applies to navigational links. This was
> the intent of the
> 2001
> S508 standards too.
> Note that when groups of links are placed in a list or frame,
> etc. a mechanism to skip over them is available to screen
> reader users- an explicit skip nav link is not needed.
>
> Conclusion: So I think the focus should just be "group" of
> navigational links for the skipping over requirement.
> Consider requirement of the word "repetitive" too.
>
> Sailesh Panchang
> Senior Accessibility Engineer
> Deque Systems Inc. (www.deque.com)
> 11130 Sunrise Valley Drive, Suite #140,
> Reston VA 20191
> Phone: 703-225-0380 (ext 105)
> E-mail: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf
> Of Hoffman, Allen
> Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 1:28 PM
> To: TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
> Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] Bypassing content.
>
> Hmmm, thinking cap on.
>
> I am not convinced "logical tab order" is so difficult to
> convert to specification/standard format, and am not
> convinced that this one isn't either, yet.
>
> Web pages that are coded to:
> allow correct keyboard operation;
> associate header/cell information;
> expose control element information;
> generally can meet this repetitive navigation
> requirement, but could still have block of content to
> navigate through.
>
> Screen readers now generally do this by either using
> algorithms to evaluate pages for repetitive int3erface
> elements, or by allowing the user to hit t to jump to next
> table, h for next header, or other letters for other element
> types to jump through. To allow this functionality what is
> important is to use consistent tagging of blocks so that, for
> example, when you hit <next
> whatever> it doesn't actually skip extra content, or skip in to the
> whatever> middle
> of the current block.
>
> Imagine:
>
> header: text.
> header: text.
> table: information.
> header: text.
> unordered list: information
> header: text
> table: links.
>
> What command would one use to jump from "block" to block
> without a specific consistent identifier being used for the
> screen reader to grab on to and pick up the next part of the
> page to read?
>
>
> I'm just writing this to give us all food for thought as we
> try and finalize this requirement. thanks.
>
>
>
>
> Allen Hoffman -- = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; v: 202-447-0303
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf
> Of Peter Wallack
> Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 1:13 PM
> To: TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
> Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] Bypassing content.
>
> Allen --
> I like your explanation of the intent of this standard far
> better than the current wording. I'm not at all keen on the
> phrase 'repeated on multiple web pages' as that seems more
> directed toward a situation where the user is taking a linear
> path through a site, which is often not the case. How about
> simply:
>
> "A mechanism shall be available to bypass blocks of content"
>
> leaving us only to haggle over the best wording for 'block of
> content', which is a concept that I think we all
> intrinsically understand but we'd like something a bit more
> scientific.
>
> As for testability, this probably is no more testable than
> having a tab sequence that is 'logical'. This just takes it
> to one level higher:
> having a logical division of blocks of content that you can
> sequence through.
>
> Peter Wallack
> Accessibility Program Director
> Oracle Corporation
>
>
>
> Hoffman, Allen wrote:
> > This one is intended to allow people to basically use things like
> > headers to jump from each block to the next quickly. I'm not
> > convinced this language is exactly right, or better than
> the original
> > CFR1194.22(o) either. it is testable, but certainly is not easy to
> > test in an automated fashion.
> >
> > I have been trying to work out testing algorithm to count
> the number
> > of links from start of page to each link on a page, take
> the average
> > link-count, and then by re-analyzing the links in variations of
> > sequence, determine if shorter paths indeed exist, and where to set
> > upper and lower boundaries on the tests to get the answer,
> is there a
> > way to shorten the link path. if anyone can put that into
> a provision
>
> > we would have a testable check on lowering "link" or "tab"
> path. The
> > reason "block of content" is good is that it doesn't really matter
> > what stuff one has to skip over to get past with the voice, the
> > important factors is to be able to skip it quickly when needed.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Allen Hoffman -- = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ; v: 202-447-0303
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On
> Behalf Of Sean
> > Hayes
> > Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 11:49 AM
> > To: TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
> > Subject: [teitac-websoftware] Bypassing content.
> >
> > I have a slight issue on the testability of : "A mechanism shall be
> > available to bypass blocks of content that are repeated on multiple
> > Web pages."
> >
> > What exactly constitutes a 'block of content'?
> >
> > Also if the repeated content is the last thing on the page, is a
> > bypass still necessary? If so, where should it bypass too?
> >
> > Sean Hayes
> > Standards and Policy Team
> > Corporate Accessibility Group
> > Microsoft
> > Phone:
> > mob +44 7977 455002
> > office +44 117 9719730
> >

WebAIM is an initiative of:
Center for Persons with Disabilities (CPD) Utah State University