WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Preceding headings and link context [wasWCAG 2.0: multiple buttons with the same name accessible]

for

From: Lucy Greco
Date: Nov 25, 2014 5:23PM

hello:
i want it to be clear that when i test i test for many different types
of disabilities and just one example ware this techneck would not work
is if you had ten links with the same name you have now made it harder
for both a speech in and a speech out user. any time you would like to see
me use a screen reader i am always open to it as its in portent to stay
engaged with the user and i consider my self the user Lucy



--
Lucia Greco
Web Accessibility Evangelist
IST - Architecture, Platforms, and Integration
University of California, Berkeley
(510) 289-6008 skype: lucia1-greco
http://webaccess.berkeley.edu
Follow me on twitter @accessaces


On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 4:12 AM, Andrew Kirkpatrick < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
wrote:

> <quote>
> If the concern of the Working Group was that some people would consider
> using more than 5 links, then the clearer way to present that concern would
> be to add an example with too many links between headings and label that
> example as a failure. As the proposed revisions to the materials stand now,
> a person who wants to draw advice from the advisory technique of H80 has no
> clear idea of what the Working Group intends for that advice to be.
> </quote>
>
> Cliff, the above wasn't the concern of the working group as I recall it.
> I'm sure that there are limits to what is practical and but while there may
> be situations where 20 links is ok there are also situations where 20 is
> way too much.
>
> What proposed revisions are you talking about?
>
>
> AWK
>
>
>
> --
> Lucia Greco
> Web Accessibility Evangelist
> IST - Architecture, Platforms, and Integration University of California,
> Berkeley
> (510) 289-6008 skype: lucia1-greco
> http://webaccess.berkeley.edu
> Follow me on twitter @accessaces
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Andrew Kirkpatrick < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> wrote:
>
> > Cliff,
> > I'm not sure why you think that it is inconsistent? The examples are
> > brief, but that doesn't mean that it might not be applied to a longer
> > list of links. The test procedure indicates that you just need to
> > find the preceding heading, not the preceding heading when the list of
> > links has no more than 5 members.
> >
> > AWK
> >
> >