E-mail List Archives

Search E-mail List Archives for

Number of posts in this thread: 8 (In chronological order)

From: Shrirang Sahasrabudhe
Date: Sun, Jan 21 2007 10:20PM
Subject: should 'skip to content' be the first element on the page?
No previous message | Next message →

***********************************************************
If you try, you risk failure. If you don't, you ensure it....I try.
Shrirang Sahasrabudhe,
Pune, India.
Phone: 0091-020-4227558.

---------------------------------
8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time
with theYahoo! Search movie showtime shortcut.

From: Christian Heilmann
Date: Mon, Jan 22 2007 2:10AM
Subject: Re: should 'skip to content' be the first element on thepage?
← Previous message | Next message →

Technically it could be after a main heading or an introductory text.
The biggest use case of skip links is however to allow visitors to
skip over large blocks of links like a menu when they are located
before the main content in the document.
I am a bit at a loss to come up with a scenario where a skip link that
is needed shouldn't be the first thing in a document. If it doesn't
have to be, there is a big chance you won't need one.
--
Chris Heilmann
Book: http://www.beginningjavascript.com
Blog: http://www.wait-till-i.com
Writing: http://icant.co.uk/

From: Shrirang Sahasrabudhe
Date: Mon, Jan 22 2007 2:20AM
Subject: Re: should 'skip to content' be the first element on thepage?
← Previous message | Next message →

Pls find below the scenario... the previous mail was sent by mistake; sorry for the inconvenience.

Hi,
In my app; on a search form I have a search box with Tabindex as 1
So user jumps to the search bar on the first tab.
I also have ‘skip to content’ and ‘skip to navigation’ links.
On clicking the ‘skip to content user is put on to the search bar.
But as the first tab goes to the search bar; user reaches the ‘skip to content’ link after he cycles through the search bar.
Is this behavior appropriate from accessibility point of view?
Or ‘Skip to content’ and ‘skip to navigation’ should have tabindex 1 and 2 respectively on every page?

I feel
< For sighted keyboard users; the thing would work fine as the main functionality of the app is available with most ease.
Using screen reader also this should work fine as the user can normally jump through all the form fields and may not use the ‘skip to content’ so often.
As the links are not visible on the page; ppl having cognitive challenges would not get confused due to the application behavior.>
Of-course this all is my thinking; Pls guide and correct if I am wrong.
Thanks.
Shri


Christian Heilmann < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote: Technically it could be after a main heading or an introductory text.
The biggest use case of skip links is however to allow visitors to
skip over large blocks of links like a menu when they are located
before the main content in the document.
I am a bit at a loss to come up with a scenario where a skip link that
is needed shouldn't be the first thing in a document. If it doesn't
have to be, there is a big chance you won't need one.
--
Chris Heilmann
Book: http://www.beginningjavascript.com
Blog: http://www.wait-till-i.com
Writing: http://icant.co.uk/

From: smithj7
Date: Thu, Feb 15 2007 5:40PM
Subject: Re: should 'skip to content' be the first element on thepage?
← Previous message | Next message →

I have several speech users that I've discussed the skip to content link
with. They said they like it to be first, especially on pages they are
re-visiting.

However, I want to explore using headers as the main navigation, something
that was discussed at the Assistive Technology conference by both Jon
Gunderson and Shawn Henry. I'm hoping to set up a usablity test and have
two pages set up one with the skip and one without, both having the header
tags formated correctly ready by March. My main content is always header
1 to see if the folks miss the skip content. I have two users that hate
sites that over "link" skip to content, skip to local navigation, ect. But
the others never said much either way, and I never thought to ask. Our
staff using assistive tech love to work with me to check out this type of
thing.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Shrirang Sahasrabudhe" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
To: < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 12:09 AM
Subject: [WebAIM] should 'skip to content' be the first element on the page?


>
>
> ***********************************************************
> If you try, you risk failure. If you don't, you ensure it....I try.
> Shrirang Sahasrabudhe,
> Pune, India.
> Phone: 0091-020-4227558.
>
> ---------------------------------
> 8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time
> with theYahoo! Search movie showtime shortcut.
>

From: John Foliot - Stanford Online Accessibility Program
Date: Thu, Feb 15 2007 6:00PM
Subject: Re: should 'skip to content' be the first element onthepage?
← Previous message | Next message →

= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = wrote:
> I have several speech users that I've discussed the skip to content
> link
> with. They said they like it to be first, especially on pages they
> are
> re-visiting.
>
> However, I want to explore using headers as the main navigation,
> something
> that was discussed at the Assistive Technology conference by both Jon
> Gunderson and Shawn Henry.

The use of headers as a navigational tool is something that many, but not
all users deploy as they navigate through your site. Similarly, some users
scan a sites' navigation block, others go straight for a site map, yet
others still use the search box (you know, the one Jakob Neilsen says should
be in the top right corner) to seek what they are looking for.

Generalizing that *all* users of Adaptive technology do this, that or the
other is simply unfair, unrealistic, and completely misses the point.

> I'm hoping to set up a usablity test and
> have
> two pages set up one with the skip and one without, both having the
> header
> tags formated correctly ready by March.

Ok, and by all means share the data - but I suspect that if you have a large
enough pool you'll find that there are few "absolutes". I would further
suggest that while using heading tags is the logical way of doing things,
given that the Section 508 checklist infers that a "skip nav" link should
(must?) be present, and that for many, many sites the initial link *is* a
skip nav link, that user behaviour is reaching the point that many "expect"
this convention, logic or practicality aside. If non-sighted users are
starting to 'expect' this form of navigation aid, why should we stop?
Conventions are emerging for visual layouts (left hand navigation being one
of them), why should it be any different for non-sighted users?

> My main content is always
> header 1 to see if the folks miss the skip content. I have two users
> that hate
> sites that over "link" skip to content, skip to local navigation,
> ect. But
> the others never said much either way, and I never thought to ask.

Exactly.

JF

From: Keith Parks
Date: Fri, Feb 16 2007 9:30AM
Subject: Re: should 'skip to content' be the first element onthepage?
← Previous message | Next message →

On Feb 15, 2007, at 4:49 PM, John Foliot - Stanford Online
Accessibility Program wrote:

> Ok, and by all means share the data - but I suspect that if you
> have a large
> enough pool you'll find that there are few "absolutes". I would
> further
> suggest that while using heading tags is the logical way of doing
> things,
> given that the Section 508 checklist infers that a "skip nav" link
> should
> (must?) be present, and that for many, many sites the initial link
> *is* a
> skip nav link, that user behaviour is reaching the point that many
> "expect"
> this convention, logic or practicality aside. If non-sighted users
> are
> starting to 'expect' this form of navigation aid, why should we stop?
> Conventions are emerging for visual layouts (left hand navigation
> being one
> of them), why should it be any different for non-sighted users?

But isn't part of the idea of designing to the standards that we
don't have to try and figure out what users are expecting, or what
percentage of users are expecting one thing, and what percent expect
another?

The rule says "A method shall be provided that permits users to skip
repetitive navigation links." The link as the first thing on the page
would likely skip a lot more than navigation.

It seems like to fit the rule, the skip nav link ought to be
immediately before the navigation elements, since it's not really
about skipping *to* the content, but skipping *over* the navigation.

My 2¢,

Keith

******************************
Keith Parks
Graphic Designer/Web Designer
Student Affairs Communications Services
San Diego State University
San Diego, CA 92182-7444

(619) 594-1046

mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
http://www.sdsu.edu
http://www.sa.sdsu.edu/communications
----------------------------------------------------------

A riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma, served with a side of
slaw.

From: John Foliot - Stanford Online Accessibility Program
Date: Fri, Feb 16 2007 9:50AM
Subject: Re: should 'skip to content' be the first elementonthepage?
← Previous message | Next message →

Keith Parks wrote:
>
> But isn't part of the idea of designing to the standards that we
> don't have to try and figure out what users are expecting, or what
> percentage of users are expecting one thing, and what percent expect
> another?

No argument, and I am a HUGE standards advocate. However, as has been
repeated numerous times on this list, it is relatively trivial to create a
web page/site that is technically compliant to the "standards" and still be
inaccessible to any number of users.

The point I am trying to make is that there are also conventions that are,
or have, emerged that we as developers/designers should acknowledge. Some
of these conventions we need to be mindful of, and perhaps even actively
seek to change ("Click here" comes to mind), and others are some that we
should be aware of, and seek to include if for no other reason than there
exists a possibility that some users begin to expect it.

Not everyone may agree with everything Jakob Nielsen says or proposes, but
because he backs his ideas with quantitive research, I tend to believe he
knows what he is talking about. Jakob suggests (recommends) that all pages
(and most certainly the home page) include in the "...top right corner" a
search box that allows users to search the site. Is this a standard? Is it
a good idea? Is it a convention? Should we do it? Jakob's research
suggests we should, and I can see no real downside (outside of the fact that
for the blind, right side and left side are mute points). Another usability
proponent (Steve Krug - "Don't Make Me Think") also suggests that some
navigational schemes have emerged that "fit" users expectations, and that
for a successful site we should be working within these expectations, and
not trying to re-invent the wheel. It can be argued that without innovation
however, everything becomes a common shade of gray (and I believe this too),
but there is a time for Art and there is a time for Business - so deciding
on which category your site falls into is an important consideration.

>
> The rule says "A method shall be provided that permits users to skip
> repetitive navigation links." The link as the first thing on the page
> would likely skip a lot more than navigation.

Correct. And in most instances, the conventional method that has emerged is
"Skip navigation", or sometimes "skip to content". Is it the best method?
I don't know - the research does not exist (that I am aware of - can anybody
point out any?). However, in lieu of solid research, anecdotal evidence
suggests that some (perhaps many) users have come to expect it, some
(perhaps many) use it and appreciate it, and that others (perhaps many) are
annoyed by it or don't use it (although I am somewhat confused by this, as
it is but one link of many on a page, and does it *really* add to the
overall noise of a page?).

So... We don't have a "standard" way of providing "...A method shall be
provided that permits users to skip repetitive navigation links.", but we
have an emergent convention. Why fight it? Where is the harm, what is the
downside?

>
> It seems like to fit the rule, the skip nav link ought to be
> immediately before the navigation elements, since it's not really
> about skipping *to* the content, but skipping *over* the navigation.

Agreed. Even here, the convention does not seem to have any hard and fast
rules, and so content developers need to *THINK* about what it is they are
doing, rather than blindly following a standard, convention, best practice
or "tip from a guy I know..."

See your $0.02 and raise you $0.02... <smile>

JF

>
> My 2¢,
>
> Keith
>
> ******************************
> Keith Parks
> Graphic Designer/Web Designer
> Student Affairs Communications Services
> San Diego State University
> San Diego, CA 92182-7444
>
> (619) 594-1046
>
> mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> http://www.sdsu.edu
> http://www.sa.sdsu.edu/communications
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> A riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma, served with a side of
> slaw.
>
>

From: Karl Groves
Date: Wed, Feb 21 2007 5:40AM
Subject: Re: should 'skip to content' be the first elementonthepage?
← Previous message | No next message

>
> But isn't part of the idea of designing to the standards that
> we don't have to try and figure out what users are expecting,
> or what percentage of users are expecting one thing, and what
> percent expect another?


It has long been my view that many of the accessibility guidelines are based
on either conjecture or the personal preferences of a vocal few. The truth
is, there has been very little in the way of research into which of the
guidelines actually *help* people, which are useless, and which are possibly
adding to the frustration.

There was an excellent article written by Ginny Redish and Mary Theafanos
which covers some work they did with users of screen readers:
http://redish.net/content/papers/interactions.html Unfortunately, this also
only covered one type of disability - blindness.

Before anyone can make any definitive claims about these guidelines, the
community needs to get past a lot of the conjecture-driven claims and
personal preference-driven opinions and really do some research on what
helps most.

So, yes, we do have to try and figure out what users are expecting.


Karl L. Groves
User-Centered Design, Inc.
Office: 703-729-0998
Mobile: 443-889-8763
E-Mail: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Web: http://www.user-centereddesign.com