E-mail List Archives
Thread: Is it ok to have many "Read more" in one page?
Number of posts in this thread: 7 (In chronological order)
From: Rabab Gomaa
Date: Fri, May 25 2012 10:46AM
Subject: Is it ok to have many "Read more" in one page?
No previous message | Next message →
Hello,
I would like to discuss this case more.
http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/NOTE-UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20-20120103/navigation-mechanisms-refs.html
A Web page contains a collection of news articles. The main page lists the first few sentences of each article, followed by a "Read more" link. A screen reader command to read the current paragraph provides the context to interpret the purpose of the link.
I always thought read more links require more description or should be avoided especially when they are many in a page. What do you think? Do you see adding a descriptive title in this case can be an acceptable solution?
Rabab
From: Jared Smith
Date: Fri, May 25 2012 11:02AM
Subject: Re: Is it ok to have many "Read more" in one page?
← Previous message | Next message →
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 10:46 AM, Rabab Gomaa wrote:
> I always thought read more links require more description or should be avoided especially when they are many in a page. What do you think?
Such links can pose problems for all users. Everyone must scan before
or after the link to determine the true meaning and function of the
link. "Read more" links are allowable under WCAG 2.0 for Level AA
conformance because their meaning "can be programmatically determined"
(e.g., it's in the previous paragraph or heading, though this actually
doesn't really do much for true accessibility). Such links would not
be Level AAA conformant.
> Do you see adding a descriptive title in this case can be an acceptable solution?
Not really. The title attribute would generally be ignored by screen
readers and would not be available to keyboard users, touch screen
users, etc.
You could make the links more descriptive ("Read more about X") and
this would solve the issues. If the previous heading provides the link
context and is also a link to the full article, this can be very
helpful.
With all this said, "Read more" links are a common convention. While
not optimal for anyone, the impact on accessibility is relatively
minor (and also rather easy to address).
Jared
From: Rabab Gomaa
Date: Fri, May 25 2012 11:14AM
Subject: Re: Is it ok to have many "Read more" in one page?
← Previous message | Next message →
Thanks Jared!
Re: If the previous heading provides the link context and is also a link to the full article, this can be very helpful."
- "Read more" can be acceptable in this case?
Rabab
>>> Jared Smith < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > 5/25/2012 1:02 pm >>>
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 10:46 AM, Rabab Gomaa wrote:
> I always thought read more links require more description or should be avoided especially when they are many in a page. What do you think?
Such links can pose problems for all users. Everyone must scan before
or after the link to determine the true meaning and function of the
link. "Read more" links are allowable under WCAG 2.0 for Level AA
conformance because their meaning "can be programmatically determined"
(e.g., it's in the previous paragraph or heading, though this actually
doesn't really do much for true accessibility). Such links would not
be Level AAA conformant.
> Do you see adding a descriptive title in this case can be an acceptable solution?
Not really. The title attribute would generally be ignored by screen
readers and would not be available to keyboard users, touch screen
users, etc.
You could make the links more descriptive ("Read more about X") and
this would solve the issues. If the previous heading provides the link
context and is also a link to the full article, this can be very
helpful.
With all this said, "Read more" links are a common convention. While
not optimal for anyone, the impact on accessibility is relatively
minor (and also rather easy to address).
Jared
From: Jared Smith
Date: Fri, May 25 2012 11:24AM
Subject: Re: Is it ok to have many "Read more" in one page?
← Previous message | Next message →
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Rabab Gomaa wrote:
> - "Read more" can be acceptable in this case?
It depends on what "acceptable" means to you.
Is it WCAG AA conformant? Yes.
Is it WCAG AAA conformant? No.
Is it optimally usable for all users? No.
Would making the link itself understandable be better? Yes.
Is it "inaccessible"? Not at all.
Jared
From: Rabab Gomaa
Date: Fri, May 25 2012 2:22PM
Subject: Re: Is it ok to have many "Read more" in one page?
← Previous message | Next message →
Ok, another question for link purpose.
For this paragraph, where would you put the link?
I think "information on food safety or to order free copies of this brochure" is the purpose of the link
<p>For more information on heart awareness program or to order free copies of this brochure, visit the city hospital website at www. website.com or call 1-800-000-0000(8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday to Friday). </p>
>>> Jared Smith < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > 5/25/2012 1:24 pm >>>
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Rabab Gomaa wrote:
> - "Read more" can be acceptable in this case?
It depends on what "acceptable" means to you.
Is it WCAG AA conformant? Yes.
Is it WCAG AAA conformant? No.
Is it optimally usable for all users? No.
Would making the link itself understandable be better? Yes.
Is it "inaccessible"? Not at all.
Jared
From: Jukka K. Korpela
Date: Fri, May 25 2012 11:02PM
Subject: Re: Is it ok to have many "Read more" in one page?
← Previous message | Next message →
2012-05-25 23:22, Rabab Gomaa wrote:
> For this paragraph, where would you put the link?
> I think "information on food safety or to order free copies of this brochure" is the purpose of the link
>
> <p>For more information on heart awareness program or to order free copies of this brochure, visit the city hospital website at www.website.com or call 1-800-000-0000(8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday to Friday).</p>
The WCAG 2.0 rule on "link purpose" is somewhat confusing, but the
document "Understanding SC 2.4.4"
http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/navigation-mechanisms-refs.html clarifies
it with examples. We do not need to artificially put a description of
the purpose into the link text. It suffices to say the purpose in prose
before the link text. The guideline refers to "programmatically
determined link context", but this is explained so broadly that it
suffices to have the text in the same paragraph.
So it is OK to turn the words "city hospital website" into a link. It
would be OK to include "at www.website.com" as well. On the other hand,
normally URLs as readable content on web pages reduce usability,
readability, accessibility, and typographic quality. It suffices to have
the URL as a value of an href attribute. Normally, text like "at
www.website.com" is just pointless when you have normal explanatory text
link; the user is expected to use the link, not to type or copypaste the
address.
In a printed brochure, it's a different thing, but printed brochures
seldom make good web pages, and vice versa. Printed matter should be
designed separately, possibly to be generated from same content as a web
page, but differently.
Yucca
From: Rabab Gomaa
Date: Mon, May 28 2012 12:27PM
Subject: Re: Is it ok to have many "Read more" in one page?
← Previous message | No next message
Thanks Jukka for your time and your thoughts.
I also find restructuring the sentence helps too. Like the examples on http://webaim.org/techniques/hypertext/link_text.
Rabab
>>> "Jukka K. Korpela" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > 5/26/2012 1:02 am >>>
2012-05-25 23:22, Rabab Gomaa wrote:
> For this paragraph, where would you put the link?
> I think "information on food safety or to order free copies of this brochure" is the purpose of the link
>
> <p>For more information on heart awareness program or to order free copies of this brochure, visit the city hospital website at www.website.com or call 1-800-000-0000(8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday to Friday).</p>
The WCAG 2.0 rule on "link purpose" is somewhat confusing, but the
document "Understanding SC 2.4.4"
http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/navigation-mechanisms-refs.html clarifies
it with examples. We do not need to artificially put a description of
the purpose into the link text. It suffices to say the purpose in prose
before the link text. The guideline refers to "programmatically
determined link context", but this is explained so broadly that it
suffices to have the text in the same paragraph.
So it is OK to turn the words "city hospital website" into a link. It
would be OK to include "at www.website.com" as well. On the other hand,
normally URLs as readable content on web pages reduce usability,
readability, accessibility, and typographic quality. It suffices to have
the URL as a value of an href attribute. Normally, text like "at
www.website.com" is just pointless when you have normal explanatory text
link; the user is expected to use the link, not to type or copypaste the
address.
In a printed brochure, it's a different thing, but printed brochures
seldom make good web pages, and vice versa. Printed matter should be
designed separately, possibly to be generated from same content as a web
page, but differently.
Yucca