WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

RE: (The return of...) Accessible popup menus

for

From: John Foliot - WATS.ca
Date: Aug 7, 2005 6:00AM

Al Sparer wrote:
> Nothing is ever perfect in this field, but we
> tried to address a lot of good comments made by some of the folks
> here. I also want to apologize for my bull-charge into the list last
> week. No matter my reasons, there is never an excuse for that kind of
> entrance.

After publicly slapping down Al last week (and getting scolded myself by
the moderator), he and I continued to correspond privately. It was a
fruitful exchange.

Al, welcome to the list!

>
> While we consider our CUSS, markup, and scripting end of this equation
> as good or better than anything else, the methods discussed in the
> article would work for any well-coded menu system, so long as the
> system is straightforward and flexible enough to begin with.
>
> Hope this helps someone and do feel free to comment.
>

The one thing I wish to comment on the most is the issue of cognitive
load. While I do appreciate that certain times and instances would
warrant consideration of a flyout menu, developers *must* be reasonable
in the application of this type of technique. Using multiply nested
lists that "compact" via CUSS and/or JavaScript may visually help visual
users, however we must all understand that for some users, too many
choices is confusing at best, and may in fact cause "failure" in their
quest. The 31 separate choices in the Project Seven (PIE) website's
navigation flyout would be too many (IMHO) for many users. It took *me*
4 tries to find the "free" DEW extensions available for download, and I
consider myself a fairly web-savvy user.

How much is too much? Wish I had a definitive answer. But *I do* know
when there is too much... But it's an instinctive reasoning, rather than
hard science - just like knowing what is "appropriate" ALT text. My
acid test is this - can I remember all of the options available once
I've been exposed to them all? How many *can* I remember?

Some studies[1] have suggested that the "Magic Number" of 7 (+/- 2) is a
reasonable number to work with - but does that mean 7 lists of seven
options? Visually impaired users I know would argue that having an
initial 49 navigational choices would be too many - especially if they
were arriving at a site for the first time.

In a 1997 CHI (Computer Human Interface) paper [2], it was noted, "The
basic insight is that, in order to navigate through a world with minimal
prior knowledge of its layout, .... that they [developers - JF] shall
not overwhelm the user with information. In particular for view
navigation, Furnas showed that it is ideal to show only small views (a
relatively small number of choices) that the number of navigation steps
is not too large and that the route to any target must be discoverable."
A Microsoft study [1.2] demonstrated that accuracy diminished as more
"sub-levels" (hierarchy) were added (in other words one nested list
inside the master list is preferred over a list inside of a list inside
of a list).

However, George A. Miller (the original author of "The Magical Number
Seven") noted "The point seems to be that, as we add more variables...,
we increase the total capacity [of differentiation - JF], but we
decrease the accuracy for any particular variable.."[1.1]

Now I ain't no CHI expert - but clearly these guys have research backing
up my claim - too many initial choices hinders rather than helps. It
seems that you *can* have more than 7, but the more you add, the less
accurate the end user's results become; so at what point do we "turn the
corner"? Sadly, there still seems to be no "definitive" answer as to
"how many?". Like many of the choices we make, it all depends...

***

The other significant issues are that of mobility impairments and
alternative user agents. Tightly packed hyperlinked objects can cause
issues for users who lack fine motor coordination, either due to some
form of disability of simply because the user agent and/or impute tools
they are using cannot provide the required finesse.

So, if you *really* must employ flyout menus, do so with caution and
prudence - they cannot become the collapsing site map present on every
page, as this will simply defeat any positive effect you are striving
for. As well, I would caution any developer who is *mandated* to
achieve a certain level of compliance to any of the "standards" (be it
Section 508 or A, AA, AAA) that due to the cognitive load issue you
*may* not be in compliance - blanket claims of any of the prepackaged
(or even "roll-year-own") solutions not-withstanding:

WAG Priority 2 - 12.3 Divide large blocks of information into more
manageable groups where natural and appropriate.
WAG Priority 3 - 9.4 Create a logical tab order through links, form
controls, and objects.
WAG Priority 3 - 13.6 Group related links, identify the group (for user
agents), and, until user agents do so, provide a way to bypass the
group.

JF
--
John Foliot <EMAIL REMOVED>
Web Accessibility Specialist / Co-founder of WATS.ca
Web Accessibility Testing and Services
http://www.wats.ca
Phone: 1-613-482-7053


[1.1] The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our
Capacity for Processing Information
(http://www.well.com/user/smalin/miller.html)
[1.2] Is the Magic Number 7 Relevant to Web Page Design
(http://research.microsoft.com/users/marycz/chi981.htm)
[2] Effective View-Navigation. Human Factors in Computing Systems CHI
'97 Conference Proceedings, New York, NY: ACM Press
(http://www.interaction-design.org/references/conferences/proceedings_of
_the_acm_chi_97_human_factors_in_computing_systems_conference.html -
requires subscription)


*