E-mail List Archives

Search E-mail List Archives for

Number of posts in this thread: 2 (In chronological order)

From: Eoin Campbell
Date: Tue, Oct 07 2003 6:28AM
Subject: RE: use of access keys (was: Next and Previous Accesskey)
No previous message | Next message →

Thanks for all the great links people mentioned.
I was surprised at the broad agreement on 1 for Home and 0 for Access keys,
which is also what we decided.

John Foliot questioned the use of accesskeys at all,
which surprised me, at least. The two problems he mentioned are:
1. Some screen-reader applications use numeric accesskeys for other purposes.

Does anyone know what happens in this situation?
My understanding was that the screen-reader function would take priority,
and the access keys simply wouldn't work. If this is correct, then it doesn't
seem like a valid argument against ever using them.

2. No-one will remember the access key assignments

Most people will never use them, but again it seems a poor argument for
not including some access keys. If it costs nothing to have them defined
in the page template, and only a half-dozen people benefit greatly, it still
seems worthwhile to define some generic access keys.

It would not be worthwhile to individually design access key sets for
individual pages, or even whole sites.

The site http://www.culture.gov.uk/global/access_keys/default.htm
defines numeric access keys for generic pages (Home, Whats New, Site Map, etc.)
and this seems useful to me.
It also defines alphabetic access keys for different parts of the site,
and this seems less useful, except for people who might be constant heavy readers
of the site.


At 20:01 06/10/2003 -0600, John Foliot wrote:
>> We decided to use numbers rather than letters, to minimize conflicts with
>> browsers and screen-readers, and avoid language dependencies.
>
>Ouch!!!!
>
>Are you aware that these "Accesskeys" currently conflict with "reserved"
>keystroke combinations in at least two adaptive technology programs? For
>example, in IBM's HomePage Reader Alt + 1 starts "Heading reading mode"
>(reading only the headings on a page) whereas the entire range of numbers
>(Alt+1 through Alt+0) are "Reserved for User-defined windows" in GW Micro's
>WindowEyes. Remember as well, that with a program such as WindowEyes these
>keystrokes are available for more than just web surfing; they interact with
>any and all programs on the installed computer, allowing visually impaired
>users to operate word processors, spread sheet applications, etc. Given
>that fact, the program will over-ride any Accesskey you may have specified
>in your (x)HTML... rendering the operation non-functional - in other words
>"broken".
>
>One other thought to consider is how often do you anticipate repeat
>visitors, especially those who will bother enough to learn "your" standard
>implementation of Accesskeys? For while it may be "standard" on your
>site(s), the use of Accesskeys is non-standard across the entire web. Will
>visitors truly stop to learn (i.e. commit to memory) your Accesskeys on your
>site? To me it's a big stretch... (although I have not seen your site nor
>know anything about your user base).

--
Eoin Campbell, Technical Director, XML Workshop Ltd,
10 Greenmount Industrial Estate, Harolds Cross, Dublin 12, IRELAND.
Email: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Phone: +353 1 4547811; Fax: +353 1 4496299
Web: http://www.xmlw.ie
YAWC Online: http://www.yawconline.com/
YAWC Pro: http://www.yawcpro.com/



----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, suspend, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/

From: Stephanie Sullivan
Date: Tue, Oct 07 2003 9:47AM
Subject: Re: use of access keys (was: Next and Previous Accesskey)
← Previous message | No next message

on 10/7/03 8:20 AM, Eoin Campbell at = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = profoundly spewed
forth their very articulate thoughts:

> 1. Some screen-reader applications use numeric accesskeys for other purposes.
>
> Does anyone know what happens in this situation?
> My understanding was that the screen-reader function would take priority,
> and the access keys simply wouldn't work. If this is correct, then it doesn't
> seem like a valid argument against ever using them.

I personally did not base my decision on only screenreaders... There are
also accesskeys for regular users that can be interferred with. The more we
researched, the more access keys we found and I literally couldn't find
enough (we had a large navigation) we could use without getting into
"something" or another.

I had, at that time, made a list of them all... And was trying to work
around it. I should have kept it (it could be backed up on a drive somewhere
I suppose)...

Stephanie Sullivan

Contributing Author .: "Macromedia Dreamweaver MX 2004 Magic" :. New Riders
CommunityMX Team Member :: http://www.communitymx.com
Technical Editor .: "DreamweaverMX Killer Tips" :. New Riders
VioletSky Design :: http://www.violetsky.net

"Everything you've learned in school as obvious becomes less and less
obvious as you begin to study the universe. For example, there are no solids
in the universe. There's not even a suggestion of a solid. There are no
absolute continuums. There are no surfaces. There are no straight lines." -
R. Buckminster Fuller



----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, suspend, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/