WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Rethinking "Skip to Content"

for

From: Priti Rohra
Date: Dec 9, 2004 12:26AM

Hi,

Being a jaws user I really appreciate the skip to content link. As long as
this link is available, the wording doesn't matter. But I do agree that use
of common word is helpful. As accessibility is not only for screen reader
users. If the skip to content link is visible, different words may confuse
users with multiple disabilities, such as users with both cognitive and
mobility disabilities.

Regards,
Priti...
----- Original Message -----
From: "deyalexander"
To: "WebAIM Discussion List"
Sent: December 08, 2004 7:10 PM
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Rethinking "Skip to Content"


>
> This is one of the reasons why there needs to be more user research
> and testing to give flesh to the WCAG guidelines. While we can all
> offer arguments as to why one or another approach to wording might or
> might not be a good idea, the only real way to know is to test it with
> people who rely on these links.
>
> Cheers,
> Dey
>
>
> On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 11:14:33 -0500, intern.wincog
wrote:
> >
> > Thanks to all who answered my questions about EX and EM.
> >
> > Now I'd like to share something I've been thinking about regarding
screen
> > readers and the "Skip to Main Content" (and its many variations) link.
There
> > was a discussion here recently about how, exactly, this should be
phrased. I
> > have a different idea on this, and would like some feedback.
> >
> > The word "skip", whether used to imply bypassing a specific something,
or
> > simply moving past a general something to something else, seems more
> > confusing than helpful. It seems to me that, to an individual using a
screen
> > reader, a link helping them "skip" or "skip to" something has less
meaning
> > than a link that helps them simply "Go to". Because different sites are
> > structured so differently, "skipping" isn't quite consistent. One knows
well
> > enough what one is skipping in the case of a "Skip Navigation" link, but
> > what is one skipping to? And, in the case of the link "Skip to Content",
> > what, exactly is one skipping over? "Skip over navigation to main
content"
> > seems to give a decent explanation of what is going on, but there's
still
> > this skipping business.
> >
> > My other problem involves the assumption that all visitors will want to
read
> > the page content first, especially when the structure of a page lists
the
> > content first (hence no "skip menu" link). I have read countless
accounts of
> > studies where folks using screen-readers wanted content first, but I
image
> > that there are many folks, especially repeat visitors with a particular
> > destination or area in mind, who want to get right to the menu.
> >
> > Therefore, wouldn't it be more useful to include two links near the
> > beginning of each page read-out, called, "Go to page content" and "Go to
web
> > site menu".
> >
> > I know that many screen readers allow a user to jump from one link to
the
> > next, which might make this a minor point. But if I am correct in my
> > assumptions, it also seems a small thing to do to make browsing the web
that
> > much clearer.
> >
> > Since I don't have access to a screen reader, I have had to do a lot of
> > reading up on them and use a lot of my imagination in figuring out how
they
> > will render my pages. Therefore, I am very interested to know what
others
> > with more experience think.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Dagmar
> >
> > ----
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe, visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
> >
> >
>
> ----
> To subscribe or unsubscribe, visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
>
>
>