E-mail List Archives

Search E-mail List Archives for

Number of posts in this thread: 29 (In chronological order)

From: Ed Eckenstein
Date: Fri, Oct 17 2014 12:14PM
Subject: Link labels and APA citations
No previous message | Next message →

This question concerns links in a research paper. Accessibility best
practices are to give links meaningful labels and not just use the URL
as a label. However APA format dictates citing the URL as in:

Burgstahler, S. (n.d.). /Universal Design of Instruction (UDI):
Definition, Principles, Guidelines, and Examples/. Retrieved from The
University of Washington:
http://www.washington.edu/doit/Brochures/Academics/instruction.html

Can we assume that someone reading a research paper with a screen reader
will understand from the context of being in the reference section that
APA citations are in this format and be ok with it? Is there a way to
meet both APA and best practices.

Thanks,

Ed

From: John E Brandt
Date: Fri, Oct 17 2014 12:25PM
Subject: Re: Link labels and APA citations
← Previous message | Next message →

I'm curious about this as well. Methinks the APA is not aware of the
accessibility standards out there, or perhaps they think people are still
publishing "on paper."

I did find the APA Style Blog and they show both embedded and non-embedded
links as examples. I you cannot get an answer here, you may want to head
over there and contact them.

http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/

~j

PS: Something else to consider; the transient nature of URLs. How many times
have you found your citations have become dead links....?

John E. Brandt
jebswebs: accessible and universal web design,
development and consultation
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
207-622-7937
Augusta, Maine, USA

@jebswebs
www.jebswebs.com

From: Chagnon | PubCom
Date: Fri, Oct 17 2014 1:25PM
Subject: Re: Link labels and APA citations
← Previous message | Next message →

Ed wrote: "Is there a way to meet both APA and best practices."
John wrote: " Something else to consider; the transient nature of URLs. How
many times have you found your citations have become dead links....?"

To Ed, no. Read below. WCAG directly conflicts with professional publishing
standards, in more ways than this.

To John, the professional journal and scientific publishing industry uses
DOI, Document Object Identifiers. Quoting from http://www.doi.org/, "The DOI
system provides a technical and social infrastructure for the registration
and use of persistent interoperable identifiers, called DOIs, for use on
digital networks." Wikipedia has a more readable definition here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_object_identifier

If the links in scientific materials are out of date, then it's safe to
assume that the author/publisher hasn't heard of DOI and, therefore, doesn't
know what he's doing.

This thread brings up a much larger issue:
Why has the accessibility community developed standards that are in direct
conflict with professional publishing requirements that have been in place
for 100+ years?

How likely is it that professional writers and editors, both those in the
SMT (science medical technical) fields and conventional publishing, will go
against their industry standards and switch to whatever WCAG says?

Wouldn't it be more effective for users if WAI/WCAG would first learn the
professional publishing standards, and then meld with the industry rather
than fight it?

Editorial style guides have been around for 100+ years. Whether it's Chicago
(The Chicago Manual of Style) or AP (Associated Press) or NLM (National
Library of Medicine-PubMed Central) or Oxford/Harts (Oxford Guide to Style),
these worldwide style standards are the norm of publishing for US, British,
and worldwide scientific material. The APA style manual (American
Psychological Association) is just one of the smaller style guides developed
for their specific niche of science and now used throughout academia. Every
publisher has an internal style guide...even my small publishing firm has
one.

Millions of documents are produced daily to these standards, yet WCAG
ignores them and says, essentially, "do it our way or you'll be out of
compliance."

Doesn't make much sense to me, nor to my editors who are trying to find ways
to do their job and meet accessibility requirements.

If we're trying to make content more accessible, why aren't we working with
the established communication industries (like academic publishing) rather
than dictating rules that don't make sense to them?

- Bevi Chagnon
- PubCom.com
- Trainers, Consultants, Designers, and Developers for Publishing.
- Print, Web, Acrobat, XML, eBooks, and U.S. Federal Section 508
Accessibility.

From: deborah.kaplan
Date: Fri, Oct 17 2014 2:03PM
Subject: Re: Link labels and APA citations
← Previous message | Next message →

On Fri, 17 Oct 2014, Chagnon | PubCom wrote:
> Why has the accessibility community developed standards that are in direct
> conflict with professional publishing requirements that have been in place
> for 100+ years?

Alternatively, can the accessibility community reach out to APA,
Chicago, MLA, and the others to see if we can be a player in the next
edition of each of the standards?

> How likely is it that professional writers and editors, both those in the
> SMT (science medical technical) fields and conventional publishing, will go
> against their industry standards and switch to whatever WCAG says?

It is 0% likely, because trade journals and scholarly publishers
have standards, and if you don't follow them, you won't get
published. I happen to think not using the serial comma is an
abomination, but if I want my work to get published in one of my
primary journals I do not use it. It's not a matter of choice or
decision, it's a matter of published or not published.

> Wouldn't it be more effective for users if WAI/WCAG would first learn the
> professional publishing standards, and then meld with the industry rather
> than fight it?

Working with the industry makes more sense than just passively
learning from it. The fact is in enormous amount of published
work is still paper and is going to be for the foreseeable future
in scholarly work, and the lion's share of scholarship is
actually both paper and digital. Could we work with the style
guide creators to help them develop standards that work with
paper-only, electronic-only, and hybrid?

Deborah Kaplan

From: Chagnon | PubCom
Date: Fri, Oct 17 2014 10:25PM
Subject: Re: Link labels and APA citations
← Previous message | Next message →

Great comments, Karen.

Yes, the accessibility community can reach out to the "standards makers" ...
Chicago, Oxford, et al.
They should reach out to them.

And WAI/WCAG should reach out to them and bring both professional editors
into their working group (especially those with SMT/journal experience) as
well as the overseers of Chicago, Oxford, et al into the fold.

But instead of making publishers change their system that 1) has been in
place for 100+ years, 2) affects millions of publications and documents, and
3) affects everyone who publishes, why not work with them to create a better
solution than the current myopic, narrow-minded requirement currently in
WCAG?

If you attempt to change the entire publishing industry, it will be like
trying to change the direction of a cruise ship. It's such a huge entity
that change is slow, takes a lot of effort, and misses the dock most of the
time.

A better solution would have them keep their current, established methods
for publishing, and probably add something to WCAG to make links more
understandable and navigable for AT users...without changing established
publishing methods.

The current WCAG standard for "meaningful text" for hyperlinks is meaningful
only to those who are blind or have low vision and invoke keyboard shortcuts
to voice all the links on a page. Everyone else is disadvantaged, including
the fully sighted audience and the publisher, because the document now must
use convoluted language to meet WCAG.

So the end result of this standard is that it helps a minority portion of
the audience at the expense of the majority. How crazy is that! No wonder
publishers aren't buying into accessibility.

It doesn't have to be that way.

We can develop a better method, technique, guideline, standard, whatever,
that works for everyone.

But for that to happen, the accessibility community will have to work with
the publishing and advertising industries (the main communicators) to
jointly develop a truly workable solution.

These folks control all forms of communication on all topics for all
purposes. It's a waste of time to fight them. Instead, you'll accomplish
more if you join them and bring them into the fold.

- Bevi Chagnon
- PubCom.com - Trainers, Consultants, Designers, and Developers.
- Print, Web, Acrobat, XML, eBooks, and U.S. Federal Section 508
Accessibility.

From: John Foliot
Date: Sun, Oct 19 2014 12:26PM
Subject: Re: Link labels and APA citations
← Previous message | Next message →

Bevi Chagnon | PubCom wrote:
>
> This thread brings up a much larger issue:
> Why has the accessibility community developed standards that are in
> direct conflict with professional publishing requirements that have
> been in place for 100+ years?

Perhaps because those 100+ year old guidelines were not written for digital
media? That when these "style" guides were written, they did not account for
concepts such as "hyperlinks" and "screen readers"? That the entire notion
of a document that can "zoom you off" to another completely different
document with a click of a mouse-button or Enter key is completely foreign
to "conventional" (i.e. dead-tree) publishing?


>
> How likely is it that professional writers and editors, both those in
> the SMT (science medical technical) fields and conventional publishing,
> will go against their industry standards and switch to whatever WCAG
> says?
>
> Wouldn't it be more effective for users if WAI/WCAG would first learn
> the professional publishing standards, and then meld with the industry
> rather than fight it?

I don't disagree that input from the more traditional content publishing
establishment would be welcome, but the thing of it is, they need to come to
the new medium as much as the new medium needs to reach out to them.

There are bright spots already: IDPF (International Digital Publishing
Forum) and the E-Pub initiative are already working with the W3C (leveraging
HTML5) to ensure that digital publishing and accessibility are not in
conflict with each other. As a fairly active member at the W3C, we have (for
example) an open action item/discussion around how to best handle Footnotes.
David MacDonald (CanAdapt) and I are preparing an investigation, and it will
be a topic of discussion at the up-coming W3C Face-to-Face meeting later
this month. (If anyone has any feedback or comments they'd like to share on
that topic, ping David or I directly or start a new thread here or over at
the W3C).


>
> Editorial style guides have been around for 100+ years. Whether it's
> Chicago (The Chicago Manual of Style) or AP (Associated Press) or NLM
> (National Library of Medicine-PubMed Central) or Oxford/Harts (Oxford
> Guide to Style), these worldwide style standards are the norm of
> publishing for US, British, and worldwide scientific material.

This is correct, and yet even these guides contradict each other: anyone
here want to re-open the Oxford comma debate? There is also an expression
that suggests "adapt or die", and just as dictionaries and encyclopedias
(does anyone reference a dead-tree encyclopedias anymore, or does everyone
just use Wikipedia?) need to stay up-to-date, so too these decades old
"style guides". I personally reject the idea that we must adapt to their old
ways - perhaps their old ways need to adapt to the new realities.


> The APA
> style manual (American Psychological Association) is just one of the
> smaller style guides developed for their specific niche of science and
> now used throughout academia. Every publisher has an internal style
> guide...even my small publishing firm has one.

Which begs the question: has your internal style guide consulted WCAG when
it comes to digital publishing and hyperlinks (etc.)? If not, why not? A
quick check at the APA Style guide extract published at Purdue University
(https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/) renders this gem:

"Your essay should be typed, double-spaced on standard-sized paper
(8.5" x 11") with 1" margins on all sides. You should use a clear font that
is highly readable. APA recommends using 12 pt. Times New Roman font."

(Surprisingly - or not - when it comes to digitally publishing the "essay",
all of the requirements in the first sentence can be met with CSS today,
including the ability to apply both 'screen' and 'print' CSS to the
semantically marked up content. "You should" use a clear font is not an
insistence, but rather a strong recommendation, and 12pt Times New Roman on
most viewport screens today would be too small for many, many users,
especially given the fact that the default font size for all browsers today
is 16pt - although many CSS reset sheets will knock that down to 14pt)


>
> Millions of documents are produced daily to these standards, yet WCAG
> ignores them and says, essentially, "do it our way or you'll be out of
> compliance."
>
> Doesn't make much sense to me, nor to my editors who are trying to find
> ways to do their job and meet accessibility requirements.

Like many "accessibility" problems, half the battle is in understanding the
problem, and finding a workable solution. Remember, WCAG 2 was written to
be as non-prescriptive as possible: it does not present a shopping list of
"must do's", but rather outlines the requirement(s) in the context of
understanding the need, then offers a collection of techniques that have
been demonstrated to address the problem, but (and here's the big BUT),
leaves open the door for other techniques or implementations.

WCAG 2 was never intended to be used as a bully-stick ("do this or else you
FAIL compliance") - no, it was written to provide the best guidance and
understanding possible, so that content authors and editors can Do The Right
Thing. Is it perfect? Probably not. But then it is up to us, the community,
to help make it better. Digital accessibility is not something handed down
from the mountain, no it is us the community working to make things better
for all users. If you are not part of the solution, then you are part of the
problem (IMHO).


>
> If we're trying to make content more accessible, why aren't we working
> with the established communication industries (like academic
> publishing) rather than dictating rules that don't make sense to them?

Well, as noted, the W3C is trying. But how many of these style-guide
'owners' have approached the W3C with an open hand and an offer to work
together? Why should the accessibility community always go chasing after the
establishment? Why not for a change they come visit us? (Just saying...)


*****
(later) Bevi Chagnon | PubCom wrote:
>
> 3) affects everyone who publishes, why not work with them to create a
> better solution than the current myopic, narrow-minded requirement
> currently in WCAG?

Wow, look who's calling the kettle black. "Do it the traditional publishing
way, or it's wrong"? That seems pretty myopic and narrow-minded to me as
well.


>
> A better solution would have them keep their current, established
> methods for publishing, and probably add something to WCAG to make
> links more understandable and navigable for AT users...without changing
> established publishing methods.

I am curious now - what exactly do you see as the problem?


>
> The current WCAG standard for "meaningful text" for hyperlinks is
> meaningful only to those who are blind or have low vision and invoke
> keyboard shortcuts to voice all the links on a page.

It does? Let's dissect that assertion a bit further:

Guideline 1.3 (Adaptable) states: "Create content that can be presented in
different ways (for example simpler layout) without losing information or
structure." (http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#content-structure-separation)

So right there, it leaves open, in fact almost "insists", that content can
be presented in different ways. So any claim that WCAG states "you must
present meaningful text links *this* one particular way", is rendered false
by this (A) requirement.


Next, there is 2.4.4 Link Purpose (In Context): "The purpose of each link
can be determined from the link text alone or from the link text together
with its programmatically determined link context, except where the purpose
of the link would be ambiguous to users in general." (Level A)
(http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#navigation-mechanisms)

The key to interpreting that statement (to me) is the phrase "...or from the
link text together with its _programmatically_determined_ link context...",
so I hardly think WCAG is categorically stating that URL's must always be
written out as full URL's, although I will suggest that a strategy such as
that would also benefit sighted users - with or without cognitive
disabilities - and would benefit those attempting to do research, and/or
simply want to (dead-tree) print out the document in question. Surely you
cannot believe <a href="">Click Here</a> is a better solution?

(I'll note here as well that in "traditional" print scholarly works, when
you reference another print source, you should also note the ISBN number or
equivalent, so I ask how is referencing a URL any different?)

But don't just take my interpretation and word for it, let's look at
Understanding SC 2.4.4
(http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/navigation-mechanisms-refs.html),
where it states:

"The intent of this Success Criterion is to help users understand
the purpose of each link so they can decide whether they want to follow the
link. Whenever possible, provide link text that identifies the purpose of
the link without needing additional context. [JF notes: the modifier here is
"Whenever possible"]
Assistive technology has the ability to provide users with a list of
links that are on the Web page. Link text that is as meaningful as possible
will aid users who want to choose from this list of links. Meaningful link
text also helps those who wish to tab from link to link. Meaningful links
help users choose which links to follow without requiring complicated
strategies to understand the page. [JF notes: there's your cognition issues,
which often do not require a specific AT tool to address. Derek Featherstone
also mentions this issue with regard to speech-to-text AT in the following
video: http://john.foliot.ca/featherstone_video]

The text of, or associated with, the link is intended to describe
the purpose of the link. In cases where the link takes one to a document or
a web application, the name of the document or web application would be
sufficient to describe the purpose of the link [JF notes: it says it right
here: you do NOT have to render the full URL on screen to meet this Success
Criteria]
...(which is to take you to the document or web application). Note
that it is not required to use the name of the document or web application;
other things may also describe the purpose of the link. [JF notes: it says
it right there, in black and white at the W3C, "... it is not required to
use the name of the document or web application..."]

Finally, of interest to both authors and editors is Guideline 3.1 Readable:
"Make text content readable and understandable." Curiously, this Guideline
says *nothing* about link text, but instead simply infers that clear and
explicit is preferable over vague and obtuse, a point which I believe most
editors already understand quite clearly.

Based upon that, I am having a hard time understanding why you believe that
WCAG has 'handcuffed' editors who must also apply other 'requirements' (such
as publishing style guides) to their output. WCAG lays out the
requirement(s), provides the justification and explanation
(http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/navigation-mechanisms.html) and
then leaves open the idea that there are multiple ways of meeting the
requirement, right down to providing multiple examples*!
(http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/quickref/#qr-navigation-mechanisms-refs)

(* one example, which I used here, was to use a URL shortner for when URLs
appear to be nothing but a long string of alphabet soup. The URL shortner
also allowed me to change the "text" to something more meaningful, and is I
believe fully compliant with all WCAG requirements.)


> Everyone else is
> disadvantaged, including the fully sighted audience and the publisher,
> because the document now must use convoluted language to meet WCAG.

Well, that is what you claim, but can you provide us with an actual use-case
where WCAG's "convoluted language" is actually an impediment?

Or perhaps (I will suggest) the real problem is that many editors and
authors are more interested in a "we must do this, we cannot do that" black
and white RULE, rather than spend the time thinking about what the
requirement actually asks for (and why), and then taking the additional time
to come up with a strategy that addresses the "style" requirements in tandem
with the accessibility requirements. I will suggest that today they do not
have to be at odds with each other.

JF
------------------------------
John Foliot
Web Accessibility Specialist
W3C Invited Expert - Accessibility
Co-Founder, Open Web Camp

From: Patrick H. Lauke
Date: Sun, Oct 19 2014 4:36PM
Subject: Re: Link labels and APA citations
← Previous message | Next message →

On 17/10/2014 19:14, Ed Eckenstein wrote:
> This question concerns links in a research paper. Accessibility best
> practices are to give links meaningful labels and not just use the URL
> as a label. However APA format dictates citing the URL as in:
>
> Burgstahler, S. (n.d.). /Universal Design of Instruction (UDI):
> Definition, Principles, Guidelines, and Examples/. Retrieved from The
> University of Washington:
> http://www.washington.edu/doit/Brochures/Academics/instruction.html

Does anything in the APA format explicitly forbid making the entire
reference (including "Burgstahler...") an actual link? This would still
allow for a slightly more contextual link text (bonus points for using
styling that suppresses the underline on the non-URL part but makes it
return on focus/hover).

P
--
Patrick H. Lauke

www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke

From: Olaf Drümmer
Date: Sun, Oct 19 2014 4:50PM
Subject: Re: Link labels and APA citations
← Previous message | Next message →

I consider this whole idea of link handling (text enclosed by a link must explain what the link is about in a self-contained fashion) ill advice. Just because screen reader users tend to develop a habit on web pages to find their way through such a page by checking out all the links on it is not reason at all to impose a requirement on content (especially as opposed to navigational structures on a a web page) to enable such use of links. Same rules for everyone! An average sighted user will have to read the entries in a bibliography to figure out what they are about, and can the use the link provided with it accordingly. I fail to see why this should be different for people with a disability or two (unless some publication is specifically targeting people with specific needs). An approach like wrapping the whole bibliographical entry in a link is just … horrible. The URL is the link, the link is the URL. The bibliographical entry in the example is not a link, and the link is not a bibliographical entry.

Olaf


On 20 Oct 2014, at 00:36, Patrick H. Lauke < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:

> On 17/10/2014 19:14, Ed Eckenstein wrote:
>> This question concerns links in a research paper. Accessibility best
>> practices are to give links meaningful labels and not just use the URL
>> as a label. However APA format dictates citing the URL as in:
>>
>> Burgstahler, S. (n.d.). /Universal Design of Instruction (UDI):
>> Definition, Principles, Guidelines, and Examples/. Retrieved from The
>> University of Washington:
>> http://www.washington.edu/doit/Brochures/Academics/instruction.html
>
> Does anything in the APA format explicitly forbid making the entire reference (including "Burgstahler...") an actual link? This would still allow for a slightly more contextual link text (bonus points for using styling that suppresses the underline on the non-URL part but makes it return on focus/hover).

From: Jennifer Sutton
Date: Sun, Oct 19 2014 6:41PM
Subject: Re: Link labels and APA citations
← Previous message | Next message →

Greetings:

I'd like to add, to John's mentioning of the IDPF, this page:
http://www.w3.org/dpub/

So, it looks pretty clear to me that the W3C is working quite closely
and actively with Digital Publishing on many levels.

Frankly, as far as my understanding of collaboration among
standards-making projects, that's been true for decades, now, ever
since things started with SGML, and then XML, and the DAISY
Consortium (specifications which *always* sought/still do seek) to
align with the W3C.

This is far more about paper/style guide and digital/style alignment
than it is about accessibility, as far as I am concerned.

Bevi, I've seen you bring up these kinds of issues many times, over
the years, but the WebAIM email list is not the W3C. Maybe you'd feel
more heard if you started bringing your ideas to the right place(s).
And if you do, you may find that more is going on than you may have
the impression is so.

Best,
Jennifer

From: Chagnon | PubCom
Date: Sun, Oct 19 2014 9:02PM
Subject: Re: Link labels and APA citations
← Previous message | Next message →

Olaf wrote:
"I consider this whole idea of link handling (text enclosed by a link must
explain what the link is about in a self-contained fashion) ill advice. Just
because screen reader users tend to develop a habit on web pages to find
their way through such a page by checking out all the links on it is not
reason at all to impose a requirement on content (especially as opposed to
navigational structures on a web page) to enable such use of links."

Bingo.
I've spent my entire life working with family members and friends with
vision and physical disabilities, long before computer-based assistive
technologies were available.

I can't begin to count the number of times I've been asked to help a
screen-reader user figure out a document. Most cases they got lost in a maze
of web links because they used Jaws's keyboard shortcut to voice all links
(Insert + F7, I believe), clicked, and ended up someplace unexpected...even
with descriptive text in the link.

By definition, a shortcut is a short cut...it bypasses something and takes
you directly to a destination. If I'm driving a car, a shortcut can bypass
traffic, but in a document or website, I'm bypassing all the text narration
preceding the link and missing the entire context of why the link is there
in the first place.

On a webpage, this shortcut used to be helpful because voicing the links
gives all the navigation links...but also includes non-navigation links,
too. Don't we have better methods of coding websites to clue users to the
navigation, and discover where they are in the website and where they can
go?

Is this shortcut - and the WCAG requirement for "meaningful text in a
hyperlink" - really needed?

One of the first things I teach my screen reader users is to stop depending
upon that blasted shortcut because they're shortchanging themselves. Read
the document or webpage first, understand the content and its context, then
jump to the link shortcuts.

This problem isn't just in bibliographic entries; it affects every link in
the document or webpage. As a professional writer and editor, I often can't
meet this WCAG requirement without writing convoluted and confusing text
before and in the link. And that does a disservice to everyone, with or
without a disability.

I agree with Olaf's comment: "Same rules for everyone! An average sighted
user will have to read the entries in a bibliography to figure out what they
are about, and can the use the link provided with it accordingly. I fail to
see why this should be different for people with a disability or two."

- Bevi Chagnon
- PubCom.com - Trainers, Consultants, Designers, and Developers.
- Print, Web, Acrobat, XML, eBooks, and U.S. Federal Section 508
Accessibility.
- 508 Workshop: www.workshop.pubcom.com
- US Federal Training: www.gpo.gov/customers/theinstitute.htm

From: Chagnon | PubCom
Date: Sun, Oct 19 2014 9:07PM
Subject: Re: Link labels and APA citations
← Previous message | Next message →

Patrick wrote:
" Does anything in the APA format explicitly forbid making the entire
reference (including "Burgstahler...") an actual link? This would still
allow for a slightly more contextual link text (bonus points for using
styling that suppresses the underline on the non-URL part but makes it
return on focus/hover)."

Not that I remember.
But I don't think that's the best solution.
A hyperlink should be a hyperlink of just the URL, not the entire
bibliographic information.

Plus, hyperlinking all of that narrative text would make it visibly
unreadable for sighted readers, especially if it's in blue and underlined.

- Bevi Chagnon

- PubCom.com - Trainers, Consultants, Designers, and Developers.
- Print, Web, Acrobat, XML, eBooks, and U.S. Federal Section 508
Accessibility.
- 508 Workshop: www.workshop.pubcom.com
- US Federal Training: www.gpo.gov/customers/theinstitute.htm

From: Chagnon | PubCom
Date: Sun, Oct 19 2014 9:56PM
Subject: Re: Link labels and APA citations
← Previous message | Next message →

John wrote:
"That the entire notion of a document that can "zoom you off" to another
completely different document with a click of a mouse-button or Enter key is
completely foreign to "conventional" (i.e. dead-tree) publishing?"

Nah. Not a valid analogy.

In printed publications, the user went to the library, found the referenced
book, and read it. Nothing prevented the reader from reading the reference.
In electronic publishing, the user clicks a link which takes him to the same
referenced book.

Regardless of the method of publishing (print, web, digital document),
publishers have always assumed that the reader would go to the referenced
citation for:
- Bibliographic entries.
- Footnotes.
- Source notes for statistical data and research.
- Other cross-references.

In printed documents, your legs do the walking to the reference.
In electronic versions, your fingers do the clicking to the reference.

Same expectation by the publisher.
Same result for the user...they find and read the reference.


John wrote:
"But how many of these style-guide 'owners' have approached the W3C with an
open hand and an offer to work together? Why should the accessibility
community always go chasing after the establishment? Why not for a change
they come visit us? (Just saying...)"

Really? Why should they go to you?

1) They're key partners with the world's content creators. They're part of
the workflow that creates and controls nearly every professional-quality
piece of content out there, including government, academia, education, SMT,
advertising, general information.

2) They've been around 100 years longer than the W3C and WAI. They are the
establishment.

3) And if you really have everyone's best interests in mind, why wouldn't
you approach them to join you at W3C / WAI so that through them, you could
reach the entire professional community of content creators and meet
accessibility goals quicker? That would be a smart, effective way to make
the world's information as accessible as possible.

4) Not approaching them is a very naive strategy if you want to get a lot of
people to join your efforts.


John wrote:
"WCAG 2 was never intended to be used as a bully-stick ("do this or else you
FAIL compliance")"

Maybe that's not what WAI intended, but that's how US Federal agencies and
their 508-compliance offices interpret it. It IS a bully-stick and a
document either passes or fails.

Getting back to the original topic, meaningful text in hyperlinks, here's a
real-life example:
The original document contained this text:
"For more information about XYZ, see www.agency.gov/xya.html" and the URL
was hyperlinked.

So to meet the agency's WCAG interpretation, it was changed to:
"More information about XYZ" and the entire phrase that I have in quotes was
hyperlinked so that it would have "meaningful text."

How does this help sighted users? Or users that print the document? A
printed, viewable URL was eliminated from the document this way. It also
eliminated the branding of the agency (because the URL is no longer
visible), therefore defeating a major goal of communication.

- Bevi Chagnon
- PubCom.com - Trainers, Consultants, Designers, and Developers.
- Print, Web, Acrobat, XML, eBooks, and U.S. Federal Section 508
Accessibility.
- 508 Workshop: www.workshop.pubcom.com
- US Federal Training: www.gpo.gov/customers/theinstitute.htm

From: Jonathan Avila
Date: Mon, Oct 20 2014 7:49AM
Subject: Re: Link labels and APA citations
← Previous message | Next message →

> Can we assume that someone reading a research paper with a screen reader will understand from the context of being in the reference section that APA citations are in this format and be ok with it? Is there a way to meet both APA and best practices.

I think there are several ways that this information could be WCAG conformant and remain as it appears in APA format.

Some thoughts include:
1. Make the work title a link and appear as text but appear underlined on focus (has usability implications because it doesn't appear interactive unless focused or hovered). Don't make the URL a link.
2. Use aria-labelledby on the URL to provide an accessible name containing the title rather than URL (has possible implications for speech users)
3. Claim that the URL itself accurately describes the purpose of the link. This could be used in many situations where the domain or page name describes the work. Some URLs would be numbers or letters that have no meaning and in these situations this solution wouldn't work.

Displaying the URL has benefits -- but I agree this is something that people need to come together on to discuss and it's not just one side's responsibility.

Jonathan

From: Chagnon | PubCom
Date: Mon, Oct 20 2014 10:17AM
Subject: Re: Link labels and APA citations
← Previous message | Next message →

Those might work for websites, but to the best of my knowledge, we can't do
Aria in PDFs, PowerPoints, and Word documents. And controlling link
appearance in PDFs is a time consuming nightmare.

Keep in mind that WCAG is being applied to all electronic content, which
includes office and PDF documents, not just websites.

"Don't make the URL a link."
Won't that confuse sighted users?

-Bevi Chagnon
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
www.PubCom.com - Trainers, Consultants, Designers, Developers.
Print, Web, Acrobat, XML, eBooks, and U.S. Federal Section 508
Accessibility.
Take a Sec. 508 Class in 2014 - www.Pubcom.com/classes

From: Jonathan Avila
Date: Mon, Oct 20 2014 10:25AM
Subject: Re: Link labels and APA citations
← Previous message | Next message →

> Those might work for websites, but to the best of my knowledge, we can't do Aria in PDFs, PowerPoints, and Word documents. And controlling link appearance in PDFs is a time consuming nightmare.

You can use the "ActualText" property in PDF to specify a programmatic replacement to the text that is displayed. This would akin to aria-label.

Links aren't very accessible in PPT slideshows with screen reader users -- so having the url displayed in that case could actually be helpful.

For what it's worth this is a generic issue for links in Word and not specific to APA. Word does have a screen tip property that is exported to the title attribute but to my knowledge screen readers don't provide access to it within Word although it is available programmatically it isn't accessibility supported.

Jonathan

From: Olaf Drümmer
Date: Mon, Oct 20 2014 11:49AM
Subject: Re: Link labels and APA citations
← Previous message | Next message →

On 20 Oct 2014, at 18:25, Jonathan Avila < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:

>> Those might work for websites, but to the best of my knowledge, we can't do Aria in PDFs, PowerPoints, and Word documents. And controlling link appearance in PDFs is a time consuming nightmare.
>
> You can use the "ActualText" property in PDF to specify a programmatic replacement to the text that is displayed. This would akin to aria-label.


Please not, Never. Never ever. ActualText in pDF is to be used to indicate what text is displayed, even if such text is not encoded as text (e.g. an image or vector art) or not as that text (e.g. a text object whose encoding doesn't lend itself to derive the actual text as perceived by a sighted user looking at the rendered page). It is not (!) akin to anything known in the HTML world (but it would be a nice addition to the HTML world…).

If accessibility is ever to become a success, we all must stay away from highjacking mechanisms for something they weren't designed or defined for.

This whole line of reasoning shining up in this thread leads to more problems than it solves… I can accept a hack in an emergency situation but I can't accept a hack as a part of official methodology.


For some background:

excerpt from Accessible Rich Internet Applications (WAI-ARIA) 1.0 - see http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/states_and_properties#aria-label
> aria-label (property)
>
> Defines a string value that labels the current element.

excerpt from ISO 32000-1 (PDF 1.7), 14.9.4 Replacement Text (download free of charge version of the ISO standard from http://www.adobe.com/devnet/pdf/pdf_reference.html ):

> • The ActualText value shall be used as a replacement, not a description, for the content, providing text that is equivalent to what a person would see when viewing the content.



Olaf

From: Jonathan Avila
Date: Mon, Oct 20 2014 12:06PM
Subject: Re: Link labels and APA citations
← Previous message | Next message →

> aria-label (property) defines a string value that labels the current element.

Then I guess you would not like example 1 from technique ARIA 7 which replaces the on-screen link text with other on-screen text not in the link by using aria-labelledby. This is currently a sufficient technique for SC 2.4.4.

http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/ARIA7.html

Jonathan

From: Olaf Drümmer
Date: Mon, Oct 20 2014 12:38PM
Subject: Re: Link labels and APA citations
← Previous message | Next message →

Hi Jonathan,

I think it is conceptually wrong. It hides "Read more" from users of certain technologies, thus it does not provide equal access.

[Leaving aside the language is far from being ideal. 'an example' can hardly 'replace text, or can it'? Who or what is to do the replacement? Clearer language would help… but that's a different story. Furthermore, the example is undecided whether something additional is to be offered or a replacement is to happen. These are different things… Confusing, at least to me.

For background: the text introducing and explaining the example mentioned by Jonathan says:

> Example 1: Providing additional information for links
> This example should replace the "read more" link text at the end of the teaser text with the content of the h2 heading referenced by aria-labelledby.

]

Olaf


On 20 Oct 2014, at 20:06, Jonathan Avila < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:

>> aria-label (property) defines a string value that labels the current element.
>
> Then I guess you would not like example 1 from technique ARIA 7 which replaces the on-screen link text with other on-screen text not in the link by using aria-labelledby. This is currently a sufficient technique for SC 2.4.4.
>
> http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/ARIA7.html
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>

From: Chagnon | PubCom
Date: Mon, Oct 20 2014 1:38PM
Subject: Re: Link labels and APA citations
← Previous message | Next message →

Not to mention that this complicates the requirements to the umpteenth
degree!

If we want people to create accessible content — that includes web
developers, writers, editors, and designers — then:

1. Make the rules as succinct as possible;
2. Provide one set of rules for everything, rather than WCAG and ARIA and
DAISY and whatever else there is;
3. Make accessibility do-able within a reasonable period of time and effort;
4. Don't make hacks or repurpose a rule to do something else that's
unrelated. (Example, suggestions to use Alt-Text and Actual Text as a
solution.)

And lastly, don't let coders write the rules! <grin, I say that as a former
coder>.
Seriously, have professional writers and editors write the rules,
guidelines, standards, whatever you want to call them. Tech writers are
trained to do this and can translate what's needed to the general masses who
create the content.

These concepts are nothing more than Change Management 101.

—Bevi Chagnon
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
www.PubCom.com — Trainers, Consultants, Designers, Developers.
Print, Web, Acrobat, XML, eBooks, and U.S. Federal Section 508
Accessibility.
Take a Sec. 508 Class in 2014 — www.Pubcom.com/classes

From: Ed Eckenstein
Date: Mon, Oct 20 2014 2:36PM
Subject: Re: Link labels and APA citations
← Previous message | Next message →

This is my first post to the list and I do appreciate all the
information and thoughts everyone has shared. I was thinking of Word
specifically. I'm developing a Word accessibility module as an exercise
for a class I'm taking. I was testing it with other students when the
question of APA citations came up.

HTML certainly has many more ways to accomplish this but Word is so
limited. Seem like based on the ideas brought forth so far the choice is
either to hyperlink the citation title and not link the actual URL or
just use the URL as the hyperlink text for the hyperlink. Right now I'm
leaning towards following APA format and using the URL itself as the
link text. The purpose and destination of the link would be available
from the surrounding citation text. Not ideal as the citation is not
programmatically linked to the hyperlink. Does this seem like a
reasonable compromise?

Thank to all for the great information shared.

From: Chagnon | PubCom
Date: Mon, Oct 20 2014 2:44PM
Subject: Re: Link labels and APA citations
← Previous message | Next message →

Yes.
Link the URL, not the citation text. That's what readers of scientific
material expect.
Good luck with your class.

-Bevi Chagnon
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
www.PubCom.com - Trainers, Consultants, Designers, Developers.
Print, Web, Acrobat, XML, eBooks, and U.S. Federal Section 508
Accessibility.
Take a Sec. 508 Class in 2014 - www.Pubcom.com/classes

From: John Foliot
Date: Mon, Oct 20 2014 2:51PM
Subject: Re: Link labels and APA citations
← Previous message | Next message →

Ed Eckenstein wrote:
>
> HTML certainly has many more ways to accomplish this but Word is so
> limited. Seem like based on the ideas brought forth so far the choice
> is either to hyperlink the citation title and not link the actual URL
> or just use the URL as the hyperlink text for the hyperlink. Right now
> I'm leaning towards following APA format and using the URL itself as
> the link text. The purpose and destination of the link would be
> available from the surrounding citation text. Not ideal as the citation
> is not programmatically linked to the hyperlink. Does this seem like a
> reasonable compromise?
>
> Thank to all for the great information shared.

Returning to HTML, and in the context of the subject title "...APA
citations", I wonder how many are using or aware of the <cite> element in
HTML: http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/text-level-semantics.html#the-cite-element

JF

From: Jonathan Avila
Date: Mon, Oct 20 2014 5:39PM
Subject: Re: Link labels and APA citations
← Previous message | Next message →

> That's what readers of scientific material expect.

While I support practical thinking I sometimes I have to question whether expectations are a reason to do something. As a pedestrian I expect that drivers won't yield to me in a crosswalk. That doesn't make them right. Similarly, if the title of a work was commonly hyperlinked then people would come to expect that it would be a hyperlink.

APA may also be used by people who aren't reading scientific material. For example, APA may be used in policy briefs, etc. that are less "scientific" and more practical.

Jonathan

From: Olaf Drümmer
Date: Mon, Oct 20 2014 5:57PM
Subject: Re: Link labels and APA citations
← Previous message | Next message →

Just to propose a small thought experiment:

… if the link stops working in the future - what is more suitable:

[a] to have the title linked, pointing to a nonfunctional URL?
[b] to have the link sitting on the URL pointing to a non-functional URL?

Which is semantically more appropriate?

Olaf


On 21 Oct 2014, at 01:39, Jonathan Avila < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:

>> That's what readers of scientific material expect.
>
> While I support practical thinking I sometimes I have to question whether expectations are a reason to do something. As a pedestrian I expect that drivers won't yield to me in a crosswalk. That doesn't make them right. Similarly, if the title of a work was commonly hyperlinked then people would come to expect that it would be a hyperlink.
>
> APA may also be used by people who aren't reading scientific material. For example, APA may be used in policy briefs, etc. that are less "scientific" and more practical.
>
> Jonathan
>
>

From: Patrick H. Lauke
Date: Mon, Oct 20 2014 6:09PM
Subject: Re: Link labels and APA citations
← Previous message | Next message →

On 21/10/2014 00:57, Olaf Drümmer wrote:
> Just to propose a small thought experiment:
>
> … if the link stops working in the future - what is more suitable:
>
> [a] to have the title linked, pointing to a nonfunctional URL?
> [b] to have the link sitting on the URL pointing to a non-functional URL?
>
> Which is semantically more appropriate?

In both cases you have a broken link. Trying to make a semantic
distinction is splitting hairs, I'd say (otherwise, if - as I suspect -
you're saying [b] is more appropriate, let's apply the reasoning to all
other links in all our pages?)

P
--
Patrick H. Lauke

www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke

From: Chagnon | PubCom
Date: Mon, Oct 20 2014 8:28PM
Subject: Re: Link labels and APA citations
← Previous message | Next message →

Olaf wrote:
"… if the link stops working in the future - what is more suitable:
[a] to have the title linked, pointing to a nonfunctional URL?
[b] to have the link sitting on the URL pointing to a non-functional URL? "

My vote is b, with the link pointing to a broken URL.
At least I have the root stem of the URL/website that probably still works
and I can either start there and search for the document, or contact the
website owner for assistance.

With option a pointing to the title (or other narrative text), I'm SOL
because I don't even know the root of the URL/website.

—Bevi Chagnon
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
www.PubCom.com — Trainers, Consultants, Designers, Developers.
Print, Web, Acrobat, XML, eBooks, and U.S. Federal Section 508
Accessibility.
Take a Sec. 508 Class in 2014 — www.Pubcom.com/classes

From: Bourne, Sarah (ITD)
Date: Tue, Oct 21 2014 9:14AM
Subject: Re: Link labels and APA citations
← Previous message | Next message →

Whenever I am trying to work out the correct way to handle an accessibility conundrum, I ask myself, "What is the original point or purpose of this thing?" In the case of a bibliographic citation, it is to tell the reader where my information came from. This includes the author(s), a title, and information on where it is/was published. This information can be very unattractive reading, but it is not prose or standard navigation, it's a data record formatted in standard ways that have evolved over hundreds of years. (And are still evolving as new publishing channels appear.) It's unattractiveness is a part of why this information is pulled out of the main text and put in footnotes and bibliographies to begin with.

A journal title or publisher tells a reader familiar with the field something about the authenticity or reliability, and so does a URL. Was it published on a university website, or at Wikipedia, or as an electronic version of something published in a refereed journal?
1) Obscuring it with a redirecting "short URL" obscures that information, and leaves you with two URLs that can break in the future, which may prevent you from using a service like Archive.org to find that original version.
2) Hiding the URL inside a link on the title means users have to take an extra step to reveal that information.

Having a URL be the link text for itself isn't listed as a failure for SC 2.4.4 or 2.4.9. It's just a failure against a "best practice" that has to do with the usability of links in most other contexts. When you look at a bibliographic citation as a data record, it would be better to not make the URL clickable than to hide it.

sb
Sarah E. Bourne
Director of IT Accessibility
Massachusetts Office of Information Technology
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
1 Ashburton Pl. rm 1601 Boston MA 02108
617-626-4502
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
http://www.mass.gov/itd

From: John Foliot
Date: Tue, Oct 21 2014 10:28AM
Subject: Re: Link labels and APA citations
← Previous message | Next message →

Sundby, Valorie wrote:
>
> John,
>
> Thank you for the clear articulation on a topic I struggle to
> communicate with faculty when students with disabilities are unable to
> work with APA citations due to the limitations of their disability or
> AT. May I share your comments with faculty to help clarify the
> situation?

Please feel free to do so, with the caveat that this is my opinion, and not
Gospel :-) - clearly not everyone on this thread is in 100% agreement with
everything I have suggested.


>
> It is good to know that W3C has the open item and are working through
> it.

Well, I know that the W3C is working with the E-Pub folks to ensure that
"HTML5" and related technologies can address the needs of that authoring
group. Whether or not that will extend to specific style guides such as APA
will require that APA also involve themselves in the discussions. The W3C
does not "dictate" anything, but rather seeks to find consensus across all
affected user-groups, both authors and consumers.

Cheers!

JF

From: Jonathan Avila
Date: Tue, Oct 21 2014 7:28PM
Subject: Re: Link labels and APA citations
← Previous message | No next message

> When you look at a bibliographic citation as a data record, it would be better to not make the URL clickable than to hide it.

I don't think anyone suggested hiding the cited url. One of the methods discussed was to make the title work like a link and to keep the actual url as text on-screen.

Jonathan