WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Generic Links

for

From: David Ashleydale
Date: Oct 31, 2012 6:00PM

Elle,

Yeah, that's a good idea -- training the reps.

Maybe this problem would be alleviated if the non-sighted user were made
aware that the text is actually hidden off-screen.

David




On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 4:50 PM, Elle < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:

> @Jared:
>
> Thank you for the input! I must have missed your making this point
> earlier, I apologize. I'm personally a big fan of this technique. Even
> though we discourage repetitive links during the design stage of a web page
> when it doesn't add to the overall clarity of the page, this method can
> also handle those times when it's better to have a clean design that
> reduces the overall impact of a cluttered, varied list of links on a page
> for users with cognitive issues.
>
> @David:
>
> I think your point is valid, but it could be mitigated with a bit of
> training for Customer Service as a part of overall training for supporting
> people with disabilities. For example, "When providing customer service,
> please remember that occasionally we support screen reader users with
> hidden text, especially in the case of repetitive links on a web page.
> Examples include..."
>
>
> Cheers,
> Elle
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 6:34 PM, David Ashleydale < <EMAIL REMOVED>
> >wrote:
>
> > Thanks, Ryan.
> >
> > I think the main problem I see with that technique is that it could be
> > confusing when sighted and non-sighted users speak to each other, like
> in a
> > customer service situation.
> >
> > Customer: I can't get the WebAIM link to work.
> > Customer Service Rep: I'm sorry, which link are you talking about?
> > C: The link that says, "Click here to find out about WebAIM."
> > CSR: There is no such link on the page. There are a lot of links that
> just
> > say "Click here", maybe you mean one of those?
> > C: No, JAWS is clearly telling me that there is a link on this page that
> > says, "Click here to find out about WebAIM."
> >
> > This is kind of a trivial example, but in general, it seems like showing
> > different people different text could be a source of confusion.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > David
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 3:26 PM, Ryan E. Benson < <EMAIL REMOVED>
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > David <a href="..">Click here<span class="offscreen'>to find about
> > > WebAIM</span></a>.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Ryan E. Benson
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 6:22 PM, David Ashleydale <
> <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> > > wrote:
> > > > Elle,
> > > > Could you give a specific example of what you mean?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > David
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 3:10 PM, Elle < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I'd like to hear people's opinions about using off-screen text to
> make
> > > the
> > > >> link unique and to provide programmatic context. We have always
> > > recommended
> > > >> providing context visually by proximity for sighted users and using
> a
> > > >> hidden span tag that identifies the anchor text as unique for
> > > non-sighted
> > > >> users. I'm interested, since I don't think anyone has mentioned
> this
> > > >> method, if people think that this isn't satisfactory in meeting the
> > > >> requirement. As far as I can tell, these two methods combined meet
> all
> > > >> users' needs.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> Cheers,
> > > >> Elle
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 5:48 PM, Ryan E. Benson <
> > <EMAIL REMOVED>
> > > >> >wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > > I think the impact of such links is a bit overstated. Even WCAG
> > 2.0
> > > >> > > allows such links except at Level AAA. At Level AA, "more" and
> > > "click
> > > >> > > here", etc. are allowed so long as the link makes sense in its
> > > >> > > context, which based on WCAG's definition of this makes it
> nearly
> > > >> > > impossible to fail. And in the cases where it would fail the
> > context
> > > >> > > requirement, it would almost certainly still pass because links
> > that
> > > >> > > are ambiguous to everyone are excluded.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I am not sure about anybody else, but this doesn't set well with
> me.
> > > >> > While what Jared said is essentially coming from WCAG, I think it
> > is a
> > > >> > complete contradiction on itself. On F36, which outlines the
> > failures
> > > >> > of 2.4.4, (
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20120103/F63
> > )
> > > >> > it says "If the user must leave the link to search for the
> context,
> > > >> > the context is not programmatically determined link context and
> this
> > > >> > failure condition occurs." I read this as if I am browsing a page
> > via
> > > >> > just hitting tab (or pulling up a link list), versus by arrowing,
> I
> > > >> > should be able to know what every link does without reading the
> > > >> > sentence again. If my sentence was "click here for more details
> > about
> > > >> > WCAG", and click here was the linking words, I would have to leave
> > the
> > > >> > link to figure out where it went.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > --
> > > >> > Ryan E. Benson
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Jared Smith < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> > > wrote:
> > > >> > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 11:02 AM, David Ashleydale wrote:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >> I'm trying to find a way to get rid of a generic "More" link on
> > my
> > > >> site
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > I think the impact of such links is a bit overstated. Even WCAG
> > 2.0
> > > >> > > allows such links except at Level AAA. At Level AA, "more" and
> > > "click
> > > >> > > here", etc. are allowed so long as the link makes sense in its
> > > >> > > context, which based on WCAG's definition of this makes it
> nearly
> > > >> > > impossible to fail. And in the cases where it would fail the
> > context
> > > >> > > requirement, it would almost certainly still pass because links
> > that
> > > >> > > are ambiguous to everyone are excluded.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > In short, I wouldn't worry a lot about "More" links.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >> My first stab at getting rid of the More link was to just make
> > the
> > > >> > >> "Leadership and Governance" heading into a link to the
> > "Leadership
> > > and
> > > >> > >> Governance" page.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > I think this is a great approach. It does have a minor
> > disadvantage
> > > of
> > > >> > > providing an extra link that goes to the same location as the
> > "More"
> > > >> > > link, but this is outweighed by the benefits of the informative
> > > link.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >> So my next attempt was putting "More: Leadership and
> Governance"
> > at
> > > >> the
> > > >> > >> bottom of the layer, with "Leadership and Governance" as a link
> > and
> > > >> the
> > > >> > >> word "More" just as plain text.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > One approach may be to make "More: Leadership and Governance"
> the
> > > >> > > link, but visually hide the ": Leadership and Governance" text
> so
> > it
> > > >> > > is only read by screen readers.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >> I'm almost coming to the conclusion that there is actually a
> case
> > > for
> > > >> > >> keeping the link as just "More" (as along as its context
> > > >> > >> can be programmatically determined, which I can do).
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > If the link makes sense and there's a good case for keeping it,
> > why
> > > >> > > fight a battle to get rid of it simply for the sake of
> compliance?
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Jared
> > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >> If you want to build a ship, don't drum up the people to gather
> wood,
> > > >> divide the work, and give orders. Instead, teach them to yearn for
> the
> > > vast
> > > >> and endless sea.
> > > >> - Antoine De Saint-Exupéry, The Little Prince
> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
>
>
>
> --
> If you want to build a ship, don't drum up the people to gather wood,
> divide the work, and give orders. Instead, teach them to yearn for the vast
> and endless sea.
> - Antoine De Saint-Exupéry, The Little Prince
> > > >