E-mail List Archives
Thread: accesskey assignments (esp Canadian CLF)
Number of posts in this thread: 9 (In chronological order)
From: Emma Jane Hogbin
Date: Tue, Dec 10 2002 11:15PM
Subject: accesskey assignments (esp Canadian CLF)
No previous message | Next message →
Hi All:
My apologies for forwarding an email to the list. I was hoping that I
could get some feedback on accesskey assignments for a site that I'm
working on. It is for the federal government so the CLF accesskey
assignments should be considered.
They are as follows:
M - skip to main nav
1 - skip to sub-nav
2 - skip to content
But it doesn't really meet all of our needs. Not to mention the fact that
I just found another (federal government) site that says these assignments should be
abandonned....*grrr*
http://www.cio-dpi.gc.ca/clf-upe/6/skip_e.asp
Thoughts would be appreciated. Especially for anyone that experience wit
From: Mark Rew
Date: Wed, Dec 11 2002 5:40AM
Subject: Re: accesskey assignments (esp Canadian CLF)
← Previous message | Next message →
Hi Emma,
Anything that reduces the amount of navigation links I have to listen to with
my screen reader is appreciated. The question comes down to policy. Does the
standards that the Canadian Government are using allow for accesskeys? In the
US we use the Section 508 1104.22 standard for Web sites which requires a skip
navigation link. If you are required to only use links for skipping to
subportions of the page then I would recommend the skip to contents
first.Otherwise, I support the use of accesskeys.
Mark Rew
NWS/CIO Section 508 specialist
email: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
301-713-0262 x131
----- Original Message -----
From: "Emma Jane Hogbin" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
To: "webaim" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Cc: < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 12:56 AM
Subject: accesskey assignments (esp Canadian CLF)
> Hi All:
>
> My apologies for forwarding an email to the list. I was hoping that I
> could get some feedback on accesskey assignments for a site that I'm
> working on. It is for the federal government so the CLF accesskey
> assignments should be considered.
>
> They are as follows:
> M - skip to main nav
> 1 - skip to sub-nav
> 2 - skip to content
>
> But it doesn't really meet all of our needs. Not to mention the fact that
> I just found another (federal government) site that says these assignments
should be
> abandonned....*grrr*
> http://www.cio-dpi.gc.ca/clf-upe/6/skip_e.asp
>
> Thoughts would be appreciated. Especially for anyone that experience with
> federal government sites.
>
> --
> Emma Jane Hogbin
> [[ 416 417 2868 ][ www.xtrinsic.com ]]
>
----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
From: Andrew Kirkpatrick
Date: Wed, Dec 11 2002 6:48AM
Subject: Re: accesskey assignments (esp Canadian CLF)
← Previous message | Next message →
Mark,
I'm probably being picky, but I don't see that a skip navigation link is
required. There needs to be a method to skip navigation links, not
necessarily a link to skip navigation links:
1194.22(o) A method shall be provided that permits users to skip repetitive
navigation links.
A skip navigation link is currently the most universal method to accomplish
this, but the use of html headers or even frames would qualify.
The described strategy for using accesskeys on the Canadian sites would
still work with skip nav links, but I tend to side with the people who say
accesskey is not too useful due to a profound shortage of available and
non-conflicting keys.
Open question: is there any data (even anecdotal) that indicates that users
feel that accesskeys are beneficial?
AWK
On 12/11/02 7:28 AM, "Mark Rew" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Does the
> standards that the Canadian Government are using allow for accesskeys? In the
> US we use the Section 508 1104.22 standard for Web sites which requires a skip
> navigation link.
--
Andrew Kirkpatrick
CPB/WGBH National Center for Accessible Media
125 Western Ave.
Boston, MA 02134
E-mail: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Web site: ncam.wgbh.org
617-300-4420 (direct voice/FAX)
617-300-3400 (main NCAM)
617-300-2489 (TTY)
WGBH enriches people's lives through programs and services that educate,
inspire, and entertain, fostering citizenship and culture, the joy of
learning, and the power of diverse perspectives.
----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
From: Mark Rew
Date: Wed, Dec 11 2002 7:13AM
Subject: Re: accesskey assignments (esp Canadian CLF)
← Previous message | Next message →
Hi Awk,
Yes, you are right the use of a link for skip navigation is not required. I
was thinking of an internal policy.
Accesskeys can be convient, but there is a risk of conflicting with other
keyboard functions. The Web developer does not know if an application on the
client's machine has already assigned a function to a given key stroke. I
like accesskeys once I have them memorized for a given web site. In my own
development I rely on name anchors or headings for quick navigation.
One problem with headings for navigation is not all screen readers support
jumping to a heading like Jaws does.
thanks
Mark Rew.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Kirkpatrick" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
To: < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 8:32 AM
Subject: Re: accesskey assignments (esp Canadian CLF)
> Mark,
>
> I'm probably being picky, but I don't see that a skip navigation link is
> required. There needs to be a method to skip navigation links, not
> necessarily a link to skip navigation links:
>
> 1194.22(o) A method shall be provided that permits users to skip repetitive
> navigation links.
>
> A skip navigation link is currently the most universal method to accomplish
> this, but the use of html headers or even frames would qualify.
>
> The described strategy for using accesskeys on the Canadian sites would
> still work with skip nav links, but I tend to side with the people who say
> accesskey is not too useful due to a profound shortage of available and
> non-conflicting keys.
>
> Open question: is there any data (even anecdotal) that indicates that users
> feel that accesskeys are beneficial?
>
> AWK
>
> On 12/11/02 7:28 AM, "Mark Rew" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>
> > Does the
> > standards that the Canadian Government are using allow for accesskeys? In
the
> > US we use the Section 508 1104.22 standard for Web sites which requires a
skip
> > navigation link.
>
> --
> Andrew Kirkpatrick
> CPB/WGBH National Center for Accessible Media
> 125 Western Ave.
> Boston, MA 02134
> E-mail: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> Web site: ncam.wgbh.org
>
> 617-300-4420 (direct voice/FAX)
> 617-300-3400 (main NCAM)
> 617-300-2489 (TTY)
>
> WGBH enriches people's lives through programs and services that educate,
> inspire, and entertain, fostering citizenship and culture, the joy of
> learning, and the power of diverse perspectives.
>
>
>
> ----
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
> visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
>
>
----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
From: John Foliot - bytown internet
Date: Wed, Dec 11 2002 7:49AM
Subject: RE: accesskey assignments (esp Canadian CLF)
← Previous message | Next message →
Hi Emma,
As you have discovered, there are issues with CLF's recommended ACCESSKEY
implementation. I brought this to the attention of the CLF Access Working
Group earlier this year, and as you have noted they are now discouraging the
assignment of the 3 accesskeys to the "skip nav" block altogether. While I
cannot define Canadian Government policy, the WATS* testing service (of
which I am a member) will strongly encourage this best practice.
(* http://www.cio-dpi.gc.ca/clf-upe/1/wats/wats_e.asp)
If you think about it, the first 3 links a speech browser will always hear
are:
"Skip to main content" (this should be first)
"Skip to secondary content" (this should be second)
"Francais" (or "English" depending on the site/page) (This is the first link
at the beginning of the common menu bar)
Upon ariving at any given site, the user will probably "listen" to all of
the links presented, to "acquaint" themselves with the navigation scheme.
After hearing this scheme 2 or 3 times however, the user will probably want
to get straight to the "heart" of the page, thus skipping all links ("Skip
to Main Content"). Since CLF limits sites to a maximum of 15 "buttons" in
the main nav bar however, larger sites also use site specific navigation on
the left hand margin, so providing a quick access to these links ("Skip to
Secondary Navigation") will by-pass the 10 to 15 links in the common nav bar
and get you there, thus it's secondary position. The final recommended
"internal" navigation then is simply "Return To Top", which takes you to the
First Link - "Skip All Navigation" (and the circle begins again...).
As far as ACCESSKEYS are concerned, as you have probably discovered there
really are no safe combinations; you will always be "offending" one
technology or the other. As the attachment you included in your email notes
(and thank you by the way for that list... I will "borrow" it), with JAWs
classic laptop included in the test lab there are only about 3 or 4 keys
"unclaimed", and even then they may not be universally available. I ran a
small test during the summer
(http://www.bytowninternet.com/examples/accesskeys.html) and determined that
there were perhaps 4 keys available, including "", "/", and "]". However,
Jukka Korpela noted that these keys are not "standard" on some European
keyboards, but in fact those charactes are invoked using keystroke
combinations. However, if you take JAWs classic laptop out of the mix, you
*are* left with a few alpha keys, including "Z", which might be a good
letter to assign to the "Back To Top" function. At least that way you can
quickly return to the beginning, and then link to the "Main Content"...
One thing of interest is the following passed to me by my associate (as well
as posted to the webaim mailing list) back when I was doing my testing:
> I've only just retested this behaviour I've noticed before. In IE 5+ PC,
> Netscape 6+ PC, and Moz PC I can use access keys that are already
> assigned to intrinsic commands for the menus -- they just need to be
> invoked differently. Sorry, but my Mac and Linux box are both out of
> commission right now, so I'd like to hear from other testers.
>
> Test page at: http://www.furtherahead.com/accesskey.php, which contains
> three links (Foo, Bar, and Edit, with F, B and E as accesskeys
> respectively.
>
> When an accesskey is defined and appears to conflict:
> If I hold down ALT and then press F, I get the access key behaviour.
> If I press ALT, release it, and then press F, I invoke the File menu.
>
> When an access key is NOT defined, both key combinations (press and hold
> ALT then F, and press and release ALT then F invoke the File menu)
> In essence, if I know the difference in the keystrokes, it doesn't
> matter if there is conflict with intrinsic functionality (although the
> presence of the accesskey might actually confuse a user that is
> expecting the menu to be invoked)
One thing that struck me was your comment, "But it doesn't really meet all
of our needs." Does this mean you were looking at adding *more* accesskeys?
I once saw a site where the developer had added over a dozen accesskeys to
each document/page. Even he couldn't remember all of them for each page.
Too many acceskeys is troublesome and impractical... who can be bothered to
remember that many, especially on a page which may be infrequently reviewed
by any given user? Three is probably more than enough ACCESSKEYs for any
given page, and then they should be "standard" through out the site.
So, while adding ACCESSKEYs can aid in navigation, they also present
problems and thus, on balance, perhaps are not worth the effort. (This
seems to be the current thinking within the CLF circles I talk to, but again
I must caution that I do not speak for the Government.)
I would be curious to hear what others on the list think: ACCESSKEYs yea or
nay?
JF
>
From: Emma Jane Hogbin
Date: Thu, Dec 19 2002 11:23PM
Subject: Re: accesskey assignments (now more 508)
← Previous message | Next message →
On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 07:28:08AM -0500, Mark Rew wrote:
> Anything that reduces the amount of navigation links I have to listen to with
> my screen reader is appreciated. The question comes down to policy. Does the
> standards that the Canadian Government are using allow for accesskeys?
Yes. But (there's always a but) some pages that I have found in the
official Canadian documentation (which is very hard to follow) advocate skip
to links as The New Way To Do It. So we have a mix of both. :)
> In the
> US we use the Section 508 1104.22 standard for Web sites which requires a skip
> navigation link. If you are required to only use links for skipping to
> subportions of the page then I would recommend the skip to contents
> first.Otherwise, I support the use of accesskeys.
I'm not sure I understand this fully...I think you are saying:
- first follow the policy
- second use skip to content links
- third use accesskeys
Can you expand on this? (Sorry to be such a brat...) Does this mean that
you like links more than you like accesskeys, or does this mean that you
think links are better that accesskeys for some isolated functions? Or
do you mean that if there were no policy to follow you would pick
accesskeys?
For anyone that's currently *using* accesskeys to navigate sites, here are
a few questions:
1. is there a limit to the number of accesskeys you use on a site?
(e.g. "I can't remember more than 4 things")
2. what do you use accesskeys for the most?
3. are there any sites that get tab indexing right? (It always
seems like a disaster waiting to happen to me.)
4. if you had accesskeys available to you on a discussion board
site (like UBB) would you use them to skip to the next message or
go to the top of a thread?
Thanks for your input!
emma :)
--
Emma Jane Hogbin
[[ 416 417 2868 ][ www.xtrinsic.com ]]
----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
From: Emma Jane Hogbin
Date: Thu, Dec 19 2002 11:29PM
Subject: Re: accesskey assignments (esp Canadian CLF)
← Previous message | Next message →
On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 08:32:09AM -0500, Andrew Kirkpatrick wrote:
> Open question: is there any data (even anecdotal) that indicates that users
> feel that accesskeys are beneficial?
I love the new accesskey for the search input on php.net. I only use it
because it says right on the front page what it is. I have to be reminded
each time I go which letter to use. I can't think of any other site where
I use accesskeys though.
If I had the option, I would probably use accesskeys for:
- print friendly (most of the time it's just control-P)
- search (most of the time I'm using control-F to search in a
page)
- login
I don't use any assistive devices and have almost 20/20 eye sight. I'm
sure this makes a difference...
emma
--
Emma Jane Hogbin
[[ 416 417 2868 ][ www.xtrinsic.com ]]
----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
From: John Foliot - bytown internet
Date: Fri, Dec 20 2002 5:20AM
Subject: RE: accesskey assignments (now more 508)
← Previous message | Next message →
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 07:28:08AM -0500, Mark Rew wrote:
> > Anything that reduces the amount of navigation links I have to
> listen to with
> > my screen reader is appreciated. The question comes down to
> policy. Does the
> > standards that the Canadian Government are using allow for accesskeys?
>
> Yes. But (there's always a but) some pages that I have found in the
> official Canadian documentation (which is very hard to follow)
> advocate skip
> to links as The New Way To Do It. So we have a mix of both. :)
>
To clarify what the GoC policy now advocates is this: Provide "skip nav"
links on each page but to abandon the use of accesskeys. This is a direct
reversal of an earlier recommendation which advocated the use of three
accesskeys; Alt 1, Alt 2, and Alt M. It was subsequently pointed out that
these keystroke combinations were previously "reserved" for some adaptive
technologies. See: http://www.cio-dpi.gc.ca/clf-upe/6/skip_e.asp
Note that this reversal of recommnedation was only posted at the beginning
of December 2002, and so most GoC sites who bothered to read the policy
recomendations prior to that may not yet be aware of the change; as such
many sites may include the earlier, now deprecated, recommendation of the
three accesskeys noted.
JF
----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
From: Emma Jane Hogbin
Date: Fri, Dec 20 2002 10:31AM
Subject: Re: accesskey assignments (now more 508)
← Previous message | No next message
On Fri, Dec 20, 2002 at 07:09:23AM -0500, John Foliot - bytown internet wrote:
> To clarify what the GoC policy now advocates is this: Provide "skip nav"
> links on each page but to abandon the use of accesskeys. This is a direct
> reversal of an earlier recommendation which advocated the use of three
> accesskeys; Alt 1, Alt 2, and Alt M. It was subsequently pointed out that
> these keystroke combinations were previously "reserved" for some adaptive
> technologies. See: http://www.cio-dpi.gc.ca/clf-upe/6/skip_e.asp
I had found this page, but I was still working off of an older copy
(September-ish) of the
CLF which still had "use accesskeys." One of these days I might get over
my inability to read off a computer screen and stop relying on printouts
of important web sites. ... Thanks for the clarification!!
emma :)
--
Emma Jane Hogbin
[[ 416 417 2868 ][ www.xtrinsic.com ]]
----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/