E-mail List Archives

Search E-mail List Archives for

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

From: Mark Guisinger
Date: Fri, Nov 06 2009 10:50AM
Subject: Tab order for navigation regions
No previous message | Next message →

Which of these is better or is there a guideline/standard for accessible tab order?
1. Have the tab order go through all of the primary navigation then down to the secondary navigation, which is related to one of the primary navigation links.

OR

2. Have the tab order go through the primary navigation. Then to the secondary navigation related to the primary navigation and then back up to the rest of the primary navigation.

I hope that is clear, I did not want to write a book to try and explain this.

Thanks,
Mark

From: Jared Smith
Date: Fri, Nov 06 2009 1:00PM
Subject: Re: Tab order for navigation regions
← Previous message | No next message

On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 10:48 AM, Mark Guisinger < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Which of these is better or is there a guideline/standard for accessible tab order?

I'm not aware of any guideline or standard for such a thing. And there
probably isn't one right answer. It does underscore the difficulty in
conveying complex menus (as is being discussed in a parallel thread
right now).

My first thought would be to isolate the primary and secondary
navigation (your option #1), perhaps with indicators that identify
each. I'm not quite sure how the hierarchy of option #2 could be
conveyed to someone that cannot see it, unless a list of primary
navigation items with a nested list for secondary navigation items was
implemented. But this approach would likely be quite difficult to
present visually.

I'm sure there are other opinions or solutions to this.

Jared