E-mail List Archives

Search E-mail List Archives for

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

From: Karl Groves
Date: Tue, Oct 07 2003 6:46AM
Subject: RE: use of access keys (was: Next and Previous Accesskey)
No previous message | Next message →

I think, as often happens, this discussion has degenerated into a discussion of accessibility for the blind.
Let's remember that users can have a variety of special needs, severities of those needs, and methods to overcome them.
The blind aren't the only people who can benefit from accesskeys. The problem, as I see it, is not only the reserved keys of a variety of possible user-agents but also OS as well.
Has anyone ever assembled a comprehensive list of reserved keys? Such a list would probably be invaluable in making a decision about what keys to use.

Karl L. Groves, Certified Master CIW Designer
E-Commerce Manager
NASA Federal Credit Union
500 Prince Georges Blvd.
Upper Marlboro, MD 20774

301-249-1800 ext.497
Fax: 301-390-4531

Opinions expressed in this e-mail represent only myself and are not in any way to be taken as the words or opinions of my employer.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eoin Campbell [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2003 8:21 AM
> To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> Subject: RE: use of access keys (was: Next and Previous Accesskey)
>
>
> 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/
>
>


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

From: Jukka K. Korpela
Date: Tue, Oct 07 2003 6:56AM
Subject: RE: use of access keys (was: Next and Previous Accesskey)
← Previous message | No next message

On Tue, 7 Oct 2003, Karl Groves wrote:

> Has anyone ever assembled a comprehensive list of reserved keys?

The list is effectively the same as the list of characters that we could
possibly want to use. The conclusion is that, perhaps excluding special
cases (e.g. when the user community is known and limited), accesskey
attributes cause more harm than any good. People who are used to browsing
with keyboard shortcuts will be upset when, say, Alt S does not open the
favorites but does something quite different. (My point is that you cannot
possibly know the shortcut assignments, which depend on the language of
the browser's user interface. among other things.) For some details see
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/forms/accesskey.html
(which largely reflects my old, more optimistic attitude).

--
Jukka "Yucca" Korpela, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/


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