WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Thread: Accessible pagination

for

Number of posts in this thread: 4 (In chronological order)

From: Dean Hamack
Date: Fri, Jun 19 2009 1:05PM
Subject: Accessible pagination
No previous message | Next message →

Hi folks,

Something I've been thinking about for a while is the best way to do
pagination. I'm currently working on a wordpress site that will need to use
it, and I found a plugin which outputs pagination like so:

<span class="pages">Page 2 of 3</span>
<a href="page1.htm">prev page</a>
<a href="page1.htm" class="page" title="1">1</a>
<span class="current">2</span>
<a href="page3.htm" class="page" title="3">3</a>
<a href="page3.htm">next page</a>

It also throws in a "first page" and "last page" when there are more than 10
pages.

So my question is, do you think that is sufficient to be accessible? If not,
what does it need?

Appreciate any input.

Dean H.

From: Jukka K. Korpela
Date: Sat, Jun 20 2009 1:35PM
Subject: Re: Accessible pagination
← Previous message | Next message →

Dean Hamack wrote:

> Something I've been thinking about for a while is the best way to do
> pagination.

What do you mean by "pagination"? Normally it refers to how a document is
divided into pieces of paper called "pages" on printing. It seems that might
be referring to division of material into HTML documents called "pages" (web
pages). In either case, what might be the accessibility issue?

> I'm currently working on a wordpress site that will need
> to use it, and I found a plugin which outputs pagination like so:
>
> <span class="pages">Page 2 of 3</span>
> <a href="page1.htm">prev page</a>
> <a href="page1.htm" class="page" title="1">1</a>
> <span class="current">2</span>
> <a href="page3.htm" class="page" title="3">3</a>
> <a href="page3.htm">next page</a>

It seems that you might be referring to a specific detail in implementing
division of material into web pages, namely how to link the pages together.
This in turn is a rather wide issues, with the sub-issue how to set up links
to other pages in an assumed situation where pages form a linear sequence
and you would like to make every page link to every other page.

That's a rather questionable assumption, but before going further (this
topic would really almost deserve a book on it, though nobody wants to
publish a book on accessibility issues as they just don't sell, so I won't
write one), I think we need to know whether you link texts would _really_ be
"1", "2", etc. - and why they would.

> It also throws in a "first page" and "last page" when there are more
> than 10 pages.

This suggests that the pages are dynamically generated pages that are
results from some search operations, or something like that. In such
situations, numbers might really be the best link texts. But linking to all
other result pages, or to several other result pages, would be overlinking
and not accessible at all. When you check result pages, you almost always
check them in sequence, so the only link you really need in this context is
the "next" page, and it should probably be named "next" (in the applicable
language). Specifically, the common approach (used e.g. by Google) of
constructs like
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
is wrong, as it puts the most important link last, after a sequence of
rather pointless links.

If my guess about the situation is roughly right, I'd suggest my treatise on
the topic of accessibility of search or query result presentation:
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/forms/qdfa.html

> So my question is, do you think that is sufficient to be accessible?

There is no such thing as being sufficiently accessible.

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

From: Dean Hamack
Date: Sun, Jun 21 2009 11:15AM
Subject: Re: Accessible pagination
← Previous message | Next message →

Hi Jukka. Thanks for responding. My responses to your points are inline.

> This suggests that the pages are dynamically generated pages that are
> results from some search operations, or something like that. In such
> situations, numbers might really be the best link texts. But linking to all
> other result pages, or to several other result pages, would be overlinking
> and not accessible at all. When you check result pages, you almost always
> check them in sequence, so the only link you really need in this context is
> the "next" page, and it should probably be named "next" (in the applicable
> language).

Yes, you are correct in this case. Another example would be a bunch of blog
posts separated out into pages.

> Specifically, the common approach (used e.g. by Google) of
> constructs like
> 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
> is wrong, as it puts the most important link last, after a sequence of
> rather pointless links.

Two points on this:

1. I disagree that the links are pointless. Often times when I'm doing a
Google image search or some research, I will mark down a list of page
numbers for a particular search result and go back to them later. If I'm at
page 37, and I remember there is something on page 6 that I want to look at
again, I don't want to have to click the "previous" link 31 times to get
back there. I want to just click on the number 6.

2. Just to play Devil's advocate here and touch on a larger accessibility
issue; once something becomes the "standard" and everyone gets use to doing
it a certain way, then I would argue that it then becomes the "right" way to
do it. Because any deviation from the common method becomes confusing for
the user. Everyone has used Google, and has used that form of pagination.
And while having a list of page numbers may be a minor inconvenience for the
blind user, it can be a big help to the sighted user in certain situations.
So if having the list of links improves usability for 99 people, and makes
it only slightly inconvenient for 1 (but still usable), I would argue that
it's the better choice.

> If my guess about the situation is roughly right, I'd suggest my treatise on
> the topic of accessibility of search or query result presentation:
> http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/forms/qdfa.html

Great article, and it gets me thinking about a few things. Thanks.

Based on your points, perhaps the answer is to put the "next" and "previous"
links before the list of page numbers in the code. That way, the blind user
never has to weed through them. Then I can arrange everything on screen in
the order sighted people are accustomed to using css positioning.

From: Jukka K. Korpela
Date: Tue, Jun 23 2009 1:35PM
Subject: Re: Accessible pagination
← Previous message | No next message

Dean Hamack wrote:

>> Specifically, the common approach (used e.g. by Google) of
>> constructs like
>> 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
>> is wrong, as it puts the most important link last, after a sequence
>> of rather pointless links.
>
> Two points on this:
>
> 1. I disagree that the links are pointless. Often times when I'm
> doing a Google image search or some research, I will mark down a list
> of page numbers for a particular search result and go back to them
> later.

I think that's a rather special case. Much more often, the numbers are just
on the way when trying to find the "Next" link. Besides, you could
temporarily add the interesting pages as favorites (bookmarks) or some
similar way. The _normal_ way to process a list of result pages is
sequential.

> 2. Just to play Devil's advocate here and touch on a larger
> accessibility issue; once something becomes the "standard" and
> everyone gets use to doing it a certain way, then I would argue that
> it then becomes the "right" way to do it.

The general idea is correct, and it's one of the usability principles that
Jakob Nielsen justly recommends. But there are limits to such principles.
The 1 2 3 ... presentation used by Google is not something that people
generally use and need; rather, it is routinely ignored, except perhaps when
you wish to peek at some low-priority pages out of curiosity or for
comparison.

> Based on your points, perhaps the answer is to put the "next" and
> "previous" links before the list of page numbers in the code.

That would surely be an improvement over the approach where they appear
after the list of numbers.

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