E-mail List Archives
Thread: accesskey
Number of posts in this thread: 16 (In chronological order)
From: Bruna Poletto Salton
Date: Fri, Nov 05 2010 6:54AM
Subject: accesskey
No previous message | Next message →
Hi everyone,
I always read all the messages from this list, but this is the first time
I'm actually asking something.
I'm Brazilian and I'm working on the brazilian government accessibility
guidelines. We are not really sure if we should recommend the use of
accesskey in the brazilian government websites. Do people really use the
given shortcuts? Do they really work well?
Thanks!!
--
Bruna Poletto Salton
Projeto Acessibilidade Virtual da RENAPI | Núcleo Bento Gonçalves
(Virtual Accessibility Project)
www.bento.ifrs.edu.br/acessibilidade
(55) (54) 3455 3219
From: Denis Boudreau
Date: Fri, Nov 05 2010 7:30AM
Subject: Re: accesskey
← Previous message | Next message →
Hi Bruna,
We've asked ourselves the same question as we were developing the accessibility standards up north in Quebec[1]. Accesskey have always been a matter of religion: people are usually either for or against them.
Given the discoverability issues related to accesskeys and the fact that an organization just cannot expect its users to learn/remember the special keys reserved on every website they visit, we decided that accesskeys would not be allowed on public websites at all.
However, on intranets or applications (where people were expected to use them on a regular, if not daily basis), then accesskeys can certainly prove useful because users might be tempted to learn and remember them in order to improve their efficiency.
Same logic went for multimedia players, because we expect to offer a standardized player for every government agency or organization. Relying on the same player and making sure it uses control keys can and actually proves, to be useful.
We recommended using the following, which have always been consensually approved:
1 = Homepage
3 = Site map
4 = Search
9 = Contact Us
0 = Accessibility
s = Skip link
No recommendations were provided as of yet regarding a multimedia player.
Hoping this helps.
[1] http://www.msg.gouv.qc.ca/normalisation/standards/accessibilite/
--
Denis Boudreau
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
On 2010-11-05, at 8:52 AM, Bruna Poletto Salton wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I always read all the messages from this list, but this is the first time
> I'm actually asking something.
>
> I'm Brazilian and I'm working on the brazilian government accessibility
> guidelines. We are not really sure if we should recommend the use of
> accesskey in the brazilian government websites. Do people really use the
> given shortcuts? Do they really work well?
>
> Thanks!!
>
> --
> Bruna Poletto Salton
> Projeto Acessibilidade Virtual da RENAPI | Núcleo Bento Gonçalves
> (Virtual Accessibility Project)
> www.bento.ifrs.edu.br/acessibilidade
> (55) (54) 3455 3219
>
From: Birkir Rúnar Gunnarsson
Date: Fri, Nov 05 2010 7:39AM
Subject: Re: accesskey
← Previous message | Next message →
Hey gentlemen
What is the reasoning behind providing an AccessKey for search? I
would think it is not of much use since search can be gotten into by
going into the edit field (unless the search is a link to a search
page or there is a lot of edit fields on the page).
I used to be for 'AccessKeys, as a blind user, if they are used
correctly and infrequently.
I think GMail does this very nicely with alt-i for inbox, I use that
quite a bit, same with alt-0 for Mobile Facebook.
But I have seen web sites that think accessibility = AccessKeys and
they provided 20 AccessKeys on one page and sometimes did not even
bother to make sure they were unique, so it was an ugly and
unnecessary mess.
Also, keep in mind an AccessKey could cause problems for the screen
reader user if it clashes with a screen reader specific function key,
though I have never had an issue with this personally.
I think well thought out and sparsely used AccessKeys that make sense
in the context and are placed on web sites that users are likely to
frequent (such as email, work web sites, libraries perhaps etc) are an
accessibility improvement, but in general I would recommend making
maximum use of lists, headings and tables for quick page navigation
and layout.
Thanks
-Birkir
On 11/5/10, Denis Boudreau < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Hi Bruna,
>
> We've asked ourselves the same question as we were developing the
> accessibility standards up north in Quebec[1]. Accesskey have always been a
> matter of religion: people are usually either for or against them.
>
> Given the discoverability issues related to accesskeys and the fact that an
> organization just cannot expect its users to learn/remember the special keys
> reserved on every website they visit, we decided that accesskeys would not
> be allowed on public websites at all.
>
> However, on intranets or applications (where people were expected to use
> them on a regular, if not daily basis), then accesskeys can certainly prove
> useful because users might be tempted to learn and remember them in order to
> improve their efficiency.
>
> Same logic went for multimedia players, because we expect to offer a
> standardized player for every government agency or organization. Relying on
> the same player and making sure it uses control keys can and actually
> proves, to be useful.
>
> We recommended using the following, which have always been consensually
> approved:
>
> 1 = Homepage
> 3 = Site map
> 4 = Search
> 9 = Contact Us
> 0 = Accessibility
> s = Skip link
>
> No recommendations were provided as of yet regarding a multimedia player.
>
> Hoping this helps.
>
> [1] http://www.msg.gouv.qc.ca/normalisation/standards/accessibilite/
> --
> Denis Boudreau
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 2010-11-05, at 8:52 AM, Bruna Poletto Salton wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I always read all the messages from this list, but this is the first time
>> I'm actually asking something.
>>
>> I'm Brazilian and I'm working on the brazilian government accessibility
>> guidelines. We are not really sure if we should recommend the use of
>> accesskey in the brazilian government websites. Do people really use the
>> given shortcuts? Do they really work well?
>>
>> Thanks!!
>>
>> --
>> Bruna Poletto Salton
>> Projeto Acessibilidade Virtual da RENAPI | Núcleo Bento Gonçalves
>> (Virtual Accessibility Project)
>> www.bento.ifrs.edu.br/acessibilidade
>> (55) (54) 3455 3219
>>
From: Denis Boudreau
Date: Fri, Nov 05 2010 9:18AM
Subject: Re: accesskey
← Previous message | Next message →
Hello,
On 2010-11-05, at 9:35 AM, Birkir Rúnar Gunnarsson wrote:
> Hey gentlemen
>
> What is the reasoning behind providing an AccessKey for search?
The reasoning behind providing an accesskey for search is pretty much summed up as a quick shortcut to get focus on that field. Nothing more.
It's not necessarily intended for screen readers users so much (who could jump to the next form easily), but more for keyboard users (who would have to tab their way through the interface).
> Also, keep in mind an AccessKey could cause problems for the screen
> reader user if it clashes with a screen reader specific function key,
> though I have never had an issue with this personally.
Yes, conflicting keys should always be a concern, which is why the community kinda determined those keys as the "safer ones", though we can never know for sure.
> I think well thought out and sparsely used AccessKeys that make sense
> in the context and are placed on web sites that users are likely to
> frequent (such as email, work web sites, libraries perhaps etc) are an
> accessibility improvement, but in general I would recommend making
> maximum use of lists, headings and tables for quick page navigation
> and layout.
Couldn't agree more.
But it doesn't mean that in certain contexts, all these options can't work together to provide a better user experience.
Best regards,
--
Denis Boudreau
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> Thanks
> -Birkir
>
>
> On 11/5/10, Denis Boudreau < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>> Hi Bruna,
>>
>> We've asked ourselves the same question as we were developing the
>> accessibility standards up north in Quebec[1]. Accesskey have always been a
>> matter of religion: people are usually either for or against them.
>>
>> Given the discoverability issues related to accesskeys and the fact that an
>> organization just cannot expect its users to learn/remember the special keys
>> reserved on every website they visit, we decided that accesskeys would not
>> be allowed on public websites at all.
>>
>> However, on intranets or applications (where people were expected to use
>> them on a regular, if not daily basis), then accesskeys can certainly prove
>> useful because users might be tempted to learn and remember them in order to
>> improve their efficiency.
>>
>> Same logic went for multimedia players, because we expect to offer a
>> standardized player for every government agency or organization. Relying on
>> the same player and making sure it uses control keys can and actually
>> proves, to be useful.
>>
>> We recommended using the following, which have always been consensually
>> approved:
>>
>> 1 = Homepage
>> 3 = Site map
>> 4 = Search
>> 9 = Contact Us
>> 0 = Accessibility
>> s = Skip link
>>
>> No recommendations were provided as of yet regarding a multimedia player.
>>
>> Hoping this helps.
>>
>> [1] http://www.msg.gouv.qc.ca/normalisation/standards/accessibilite/
>> --
>> Denis Boudreau
>> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2010-11-05, at 8:52 AM, Bruna Poletto Salton wrote:
>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> I always read all the messages from this list, but this is the first time
>>> I'm actually asking something.
>>>
>>> I'm Brazilian and I'm working on the brazilian government accessibility
>>> guidelines. We are not really sure if we should recommend the use of
>>> accesskey in the brazilian government websites. Do people really use the
>>> given shortcuts? Do they really work well?
>>>
>>> Thanks!!
>>>
>>> --
>>> Bruna Poletto Salton
>>> Projeto Acessibilidade Virtual da RENAPI | Núcleo Bento Gonçalves
>>> (Virtual Accessibility Project)
>>> www.bento.ifrs.edu.br/acessibilidade
>>> (55) (54) 3455 3219
>>>
From: John Foliot
Date: Fri, Nov 05 2010 9:57AM
Subject: Re: accesskey
← Previous message | Next message →
Exactly.
JF
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto:webaim-forum-
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Ted
> Sent: Friday, November 05, 2010 8:53 AM
> To: 'WebAIM Discussion List'
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] accesskey
>
> Isn't the problem with access keys that there are always going to be
> clashes. Alt + 0, for example, is often used to jump to an
> accessibility
> page. But what if I'm in a form and I want to type a en-dash (Alt +
> 0150) or
> and em-dash (Alt + 0151) or an "é" (Alt + 0233) and so on?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Denis Boudreau [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
> Sent: 05 November 2010 14:52
> To: WebAIM Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] accesskey
>
>
> Hello,
>
>
> On 2010-11-05, at 9:35 AM, Birkir Rúnar Gunnarsson wrote:
>
> > Hey gentlemen
> >
> > What is the reasoning behind providing an AccessKey for search?
>
> The reasoning behind providing an accesskey for search is pretty much
> summed
> up as a quick shortcut to get focus on that field. Nothing more.
>
> It's not necessarily intended for screen readers users so much (who
> could
> jump to the next form easily), but more for keyboard users (who would
> have
> to tab their way through the interface).
>
>
>
> > Also, keep in mind an AccessKey could cause problems for the screen
> > reader user if it clashes with a screen reader specific function key,
> > though I have never had an issue with this personally.
>
> Yes, conflicting keys should always be a concern, which is why the
> community
> kinda determined those keys as the "safer ones", though we can never
> know
> for sure.
>
>
> > I think well thought out and sparsely used AccessKeys that make sense
> > in the context and are placed on web sites that users are likely to
> > frequent (such as email, work web sites, libraries perhaps etc) are
> an
> > accessibility improvement, but in general I would recommend making
> > maximum use of lists, headings and tables for quick page navigation
> > and layout.
>
> Couldn't agree more.
>
> But it doesn't mean that in certain contexts, all these options can't
> work
> together to provide a better user experience.
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> --
> Denis Boudreau
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Thanks
> > -Birkir
> >
> >
> > On 11/5/10, Denis Boudreau < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> >> Hi Bruna,
> >>
> >> We've asked ourselves the same question as we were developing the
> >> accessibility standards up north in Quebec[1]. Accesskey have always
> >> been a matter of religion: people are usually either for or against
> >> them.
> >>
> >> Given the discoverability issues related to accesskeys and the fact
> >> that an organization just cannot expect its users to learn/remember
> >> the special keys reserved on every website they visit, we decided
> >> that accesskeys would not be allowed on public websites at all.
> >>
> >> However, on intranets or applications (where people were expected to
> >> use them on a regular, if not daily basis), then accesskeys can
> >> certainly prove useful because users might be tempted to learn and
> >> remember them in order to improve their efficiency.
> >>
> >> Same logic went for multimedia players, because we expect to offer a
> >> standardized player for every government agency or organization.
> >> Relying on the same player and making sure it uses control keys can
> >> and actually proves, to be useful.
> >>
> >> We recommended using the following, which have always been
> >> consensually
> >> approved:
> >>
> >> 1 = Homepage
> >> 3 = Site map
> >> 4 = Search
> >> 9 = Contact Us
> >> 0 = Accessibility
> >> s = Skip link
> >>
> >> No recommendations were provided as of yet regarding a multimedia
> >> player.
> >>
> >> Hoping this helps.
> >>
> >> [1] http://www.msg.gouv.qc.ca/normalisation/standards/accessibilite/
> >> --
> >> Denis Boudreau
> >> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2010-11-05, at 8:52 AM, Bruna Poletto Salton wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi everyone,
> >>>
> >>> I always read all the messages from this list, but this is the
> first
> >>> time I'm actually asking something.
> >>>
> >>> I'm Brazilian and I'm working on the brazilian government
> >>> accessibility guidelines. We are not really sure if we should
> >>> recommend the use of accesskey in the brazilian government
> websites.
> >>> Do people really use the given shortcuts? Do they really work well?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks!!
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Bruna Poletto Salton
> >>> Projeto Acessibilidade Virtual da RENAPI | Núcleo Bento Gonçalves
> >>> (Virtual Accessibility Project)
> www.bento.ifrs.edu.br/acessibilidade
> >>> (55) (54) 3455 3219
> >>>
From: Ted
Date: Fri, Nov 05 2010 10:09AM
Subject: Re: accesskey
← Previous message | Next message →
Isn't the problem with access keys that there are always going to be
clashes. Alt + 0, for example, is often used to jump to an accessibility
page. But what if I'm in a form and I want to type a en-dash (Alt + 0150) or
and em-dash (Alt + 0151) or an "é" (Alt + 0233) and so on?
-----Original Message-----
From: Denis Boudreau [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
Sent: 05 November 2010 14:52
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] accesskey
Hello,
On 2010-11-05, at 9:35 AM, Birkir Rúnar Gunnarsson wrote:
> Hey gentlemen
>
> What is the reasoning behind providing an AccessKey for search?
The reasoning behind providing an accesskey for search is pretty much summed
up as a quick shortcut to get focus on that field. Nothing more.
It's not necessarily intended for screen readers users so much (who could
jump to the next form easily), but more for keyboard users (who would have
to tab their way through the interface).
> Also, keep in mind an AccessKey could cause problems for the screen
> reader user if it clashes with a screen reader specific function key,
> though I have never had an issue with this personally.
Yes, conflicting keys should always be a concern, which is why the community
kinda determined those keys as the "safer ones", though we can never know
for sure.
> I think well thought out and sparsely used AccessKeys that make sense
> in the context and are placed on web sites that users are likely to
> frequent (such as email, work web sites, libraries perhaps etc) are an
> accessibility improvement, but in general I would recommend making
> maximum use of lists, headings and tables for quick page navigation
> and layout.
Couldn't agree more.
But it doesn't mean that in certain contexts, all these options can't work
together to provide a better user experience.
Best regards,
--
Denis Boudreau
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> Thanks
> -Birkir
>
>
> On 11/5/10, Denis Boudreau < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>> Hi Bruna,
>>
>> We've asked ourselves the same question as we were developing the
>> accessibility standards up north in Quebec[1]. Accesskey have always
>> been a matter of religion: people are usually either for or against
>> them.
>>
>> Given the discoverability issues related to accesskeys and the fact
>> that an organization just cannot expect its users to learn/remember
>> the special keys reserved on every website they visit, we decided
>> that accesskeys would not be allowed on public websites at all.
>>
>> However, on intranets or applications (where people were expected to
>> use them on a regular, if not daily basis), then accesskeys can
>> certainly prove useful because users might be tempted to learn and
>> remember them in order to improve their efficiency.
>>
>> Same logic went for multimedia players, because we expect to offer a
>> standardized player for every government agency or organization.
>> Relying on the same player and making sure it uses control keys can
>> and actually proves, to be useful.
>>
>> We recommended using the following, which have always been
>> consensually
>> approved:
>>
>> 1 = Homepage
>> 3 = Site map
>> 4 = Search
>> 9 = Contact Us
>> 0 = Accessibility
>> s = Skip link
>>
>> No recommendations were provided as of yet regarding a multimedia
>> player.
>>
>> Hoping this helps.
>>
>> [1] http://www.msg.gouv.qc.ca/normalisation/standards/accessibilite/
>> --
>> Denis Boudreau
>> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2010-11-05, at 8:52 AM, Bruna Poletto Salton wrote:
>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> I always read all the messages from this list, but this is the first
>>> time I'm actually asking something.
>>>
>>> I'm Brazilian and I'm working on the brazilian government
>>> accessibility guidelines. We are not really sure if we should
>>> recommend the use of accesskey in the brazilian government websites.
>>> Do people really use the given shortcuts? Do they really work well?
>>>
>>> Thanks!!
>>>
>>> --
>>> Bruna Poletto Salton
>>> Projeto Acessibilidade Virtual da RENAPI | Núcleo Bento Gonçalves
>>> (Virtual Accessibility Project) www.bento.ifrs.edu.br/acessibilidade
>>> (55) (54) 3455 3219
>>>
From: Denis Boudreau
Date: Fri, Nov 05 2010 10:30AM
Subject: Re: accesskey
← Previous message | Next message →
It could be, but in very specific browsers only since some of them require the user to validate the jump by pressing the enter key.
But granted, given the use of such entries, it could cause another problem. Not the main reason, but one of the many reasons why we decided to forbid their use on public websites.
/Denis
On 2010-11-05, at 11:53, "Ted" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Isn't the problem with access keys that there are always going to be
> clashes. Alt + 0, for example, is often used to jump to an accessibility
> page. But what if I'm in a form and I want to type a en-dash (Alt + 0150) or
> and em-dash (Alt + 0151) or an "é" (Alt + 0233) and so on?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Denis Boudreau [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
> Sent: 05 November 2010 14:52
> To: WebAIM Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] accesskey
>
>
> Hello,
>
>
> On 2010-11-05, at 9:35 AM, Birkir Rúnar Gunnarsson wrote:
>
>> Hey gentlemen
>>
>> What is the reasoning behind providing an AccessKey for search?
>
> The reasoning behind providing an accesskey for search is pretty much summed
> up as a quick shortcut to get focus on that field. Nothing more.
>
> It's not necessarily intended for screen readers users so much (who could
> jump to the next form easily), but more for keyboard users (who would have
> to tab their way through the interface).
>
>
>
>> Also, keep in mind an AccessKey could cause problems for the screen
>> reader user if it clashes with a screen reader specific function key,
>> though I have never had an issue with this personally.
>
> Yes, conflicting keys should always be a concern, which is why the community
> kinda determined those keys as the "safer ones", though we can never know
> for sure.
>
>
>> I think well thought out and sparsely used AccessKeys that make sense
>> in the context and are placed on web sites that users are likely to
>> frequent (such as email, work web sites, libraries perhaps etc) are an
>> accessibility improvement, but in general I would recommend making
>> maximum use of lists, headings and tables for quick page navigation
>> and layout.
>
> Couldn't agree more.
>
> But it doesn't mean that in certain contexts, all these options can't work
> together to provide a better user experience.
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> --
> Denis Boudreau
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> Thanks
>> -Birkir
>>
>>
>> On 11/5/10, Denis Boudreau < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>>> Hi Bruna,
>>>
>>> We've asked ourselves the same question as we were developing the
>>> accessibility standards up north in Quebec[1]. Accesskey have always
>>> been a matter of religion: people are usually either for or against
>>> them.
>>>
>>> Given the discoverability issues related to accesskeys and the fact
>>> that an organization just cannot expect its users to learn/remember
>>> the special keys reserved on every website they visit, we decided
>>> that accesskeys would not be allowed on public websites at all.
>>>
>>> However, on intranets or applications (where people were expected to
>>> use them on a regular, if not daily basis), then accesskeys can
>>> certainly prove useful because users might be tempted to learn and
>>> remember them in order to improve their efficiency.
>>>
>>> Same logic went for multimedia players, because we expect to offer a
>>> standardized player for every government agency or organization.
>>> Relying on the same player and making sure it uses control keys can
>>> and actually proves, to be useful.
>>>
>>> We recommended using the following, which have always been
>>> consensually
>>> approved:
>>>
>>> 1 = Homepage
>>> 3 = Site map
>>> 4 = Search
>>> 9 = Contact Us
>>> 0 = Accessibility
>>> s = Skip link
>>>
>>> No recommendations were provided as of yet regarding a multimedia
>>> player.
>>>
>>> Hoping this helps.
>>>
>>> [1] http://www.msg.gouv.qc.ca/normalisation/standards/accessibilite/
>>> --
>>> Denis Boudreau
>>> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2010-11-05, at 8:52 AM, Bruna Poletto Salton wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>
>>>> I always read all the messages from this list, but this is the first
>>>> time I'm actually asking something.
>>>>
>>>> I'm Brazilian and I'm working on the brazilian government
>>>> accessibility guidelines. We are not really sure if we should
>>>> recommend the use of accesskey in the brazilian government websites.
>>>> Do people really use the given shortcuts? Do they really work well?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!!
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Bruna Poletto Salton
>>>> Projeto Acessibilidade Virtual da RENAPI | Núcleo Bento Gonçalves
>>>> (Virtual Accessibility Project) www.bento.ifrs.edu.br/acessibilidade
>>>> (55) (54) 3455 3219
>>>>
From: Birkir Rúnar Gunnarsson
Date: Fri, Nov 05 2010 4:30PM
Subject: Re: accesskey
← Previous message | Next message →
In this particular case, wouldn't you be in edit mode inside the
field, so your alt key actions will not trigger the AccessKey
attribute?
Also don't you have to use the numbers on the keypad when enterring
the ascii values of characters, but the al plus 0 accesskey refers
specifically to the number keys at the top of your keyboard.
I may be wrong about this, and always happy to be corrected, but I
think in this particular example, this shouldnot cause a screen reader
user a problem.
-B
On 11/5/10, Denis Boudreau < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> It could be, but in very specific browsers only since some of them require
> the user to validate the jump by pressing the enter key.
>
> But granted, given the use of such entries, it could cause another problem.
> Not the main reason, but one of the many reasons why we decided to forbid
> their use on public websites.
>
> /Denis
>
>
>
> On 2010-11-05, at 11:53, "Ted" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>
>> Isn't the problem with access keys that there are always going to be
>> clashes. Alt + 0, for example, is often used to jump to an accessibility
>> page. But what if I'm in a form and I want to type a en-dash (Alt + 0150)
>> or
>> and em-dash (Alt + 0151) or an "é" (Alt + 0233) and so on?
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Denis Boudreau [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
>> Sent: 05 November 2010 14:52
>> To: WebAIM Discussion List
>> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] accesskey
>>
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>>
>> On 2010-11-05, at 9:35 AM, Birkir Rúnar Gunnarsson wrote:
>>
>>> Hey gentlemen
>>>
>>> What is the reasoning behind providing an AccessKey for search?
>>
>> The reasoning behind providing an accesskey for search is pretty much
>> summed
>> up as a quick shortcut to get focus on that field. Nothing more.
>>
>> It's not necessarily intended for screen readers users so much (who could
>> jump to the next form easily), but more for keyboard users (who would have
>> to tab their way through the interface).
>>
>>
>>
>>> Also, keep in mind an AccessKey could cause problems for the screen
>>> reader user if it clashes with a screen reader specific function key,
>>> though I have never had an issue with this personally.
>>
>> Yes, conflicting keys should always be a concern, which is why the
>> community
>> kinda determined those keys as the "safer ones", though we can never know
>> for sure.
>>
>>
>>> I think well thought out and sparsely used AccessKeys that make sense
>>> in the context and are placed on web sites that users are likely to
>>> frequent (such as email, work web sites, libraries perhaps etc) are an
>>> accessibility improvement, but in general I would recommend making
>>> maximum use of lists, headings and tables for quick page navigation
>>> and layout.
>>
>> Couldn't agree more.
>>
>> But it doesn't mean that in certain contexts, all these options can't work
>> together to provide a better user experience.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>>
>> --
>> Denis Boudreau
>> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Thanks
>>> -Birkir
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/5/10, Denis Boudreau < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>>>> Hi Bruna,
>>>>
>>>> We've asked ourselves the same question as we were developing the
>>>> accessibility standards up north in Quebec[1]. Accesskey have always
>>>> been a matter of religion: people are usually either for or against
>>>> them.
>>>>
>>>> Given the discoverability issues related to accesskeys and the fact
>>>> that an organization just cannot expect its users to learn/remember
>>>> the special keys reserved on every website they visit, we decided
>>>> that accesskeys would not be allowed on public websites at all.
>>>>
>>>> However, on intranets or applications (where people were expected to
>>>> use them on a regular, if not daily basis), then accesskeys can
>>>> certainly prove useful because users might be tempted to learn and
>>>> remember them in order to improve their efficiency.
>>>>
>>>> Same logic went for multimedia players, because we expect to offer a
>>>> standardized player for every government agency or organization.
>>>> Relying on the same player and making sure it uses control keys can
>>>> and actually proves, to be useful.
>>>>
>>>> We recommended using the following, which have always been
>>>> consensually
>>>> approved:
>>>>
>>>> 1 = Homepage
>>>> 3 = Site map
>>>> 4 = Search
>>>> 9 = Contact Us
>>>> 0 = Accessibility
>>>> s = Skip link
>>>>
>>>> No recommendations were provided as of yet regarding a multimedia
>>>> player.
>>>>
>>>> Hoping this helps.
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://www.msg.gouv.qc.ca/normalisation/standards/accessibilite/
>>>> --
>>>> Denis Boudreau
>>>> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2010-11-05, at 8:52 AM, Bruna Poletto Salton wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>>
>>>>> I always read all the messages from this list, but this is the first
>>>>> time I'm actually asking something.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm Brazilian and I'm working on the brazilian government
>>>>> accessibility guidelines. We are not really sure if we should
>>>>> recommend the use of accesskey in the brazilian government websites.
>>>>> Do people really use the given shortcuts? Do they really work well?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks!!
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Bruna Poletto Salton
>>>>> Projeto Acessibilidade Virtual da RENAPI | Núcleo Bento Gonçalves
>>>>> (Virtual Accessibility Project) www.bento.ifrs.edu.br/acessibilidade
>>>>> (55) (54) 3455 3219
>>>>>
From: Bruna Poletto Salton
Date: Tue, Nov 09 2010 5:51AM
Subject: Re: accesskey
← Previous message | Next message →
Thanks Denis.
This actually helped a lot. We believe that the shortcuts are a good thing.
All my blind co-workers really use them and expect that the website will
provide shortcuts.
But, there are some other people who think there's no need to offer
shortcuts. So, we're still discussing about this issue. I think it's gonna
take some time until we put a closure on this.
Thanks a lot.
Bruna Poletto Salton
Projeto Acessibilidade Virtual da RENAPI | Núcleo Bento Gonçalves
http://bento.ifrs.edu.br/acessibilidade
(55)(54) 3455 3219
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Denis Boudreau < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >wrote:
> Hi Bruna,
>
> We've asked ourselves the same question as we were developing the
> accessibility standards up north in Quebec[1]. Accesskey have always been a
> matter of religion: people are usually either for or against them.
>
> Given the discoverability issues related to accesskeys and the fact that an
> organization just cannot expect its users to learn/remember the special keys
> reserved on every website they visit, we decided that accesskeys would not
> be allowed on public websites at all.
>
> However, on intranets or applications (where people were expected to use
> them on a regular, if not daily basis), then accesskeys can certainly prove
> useful because users might be tempted to learn and remember them in order to
> improve their efficiency.
>
> Same logic went for multimedia players, because we expect to offer a
> standardized player for every government agency or organization. Relying on
> the same player and making sure it uses control keys can and actually
> proves, to be useful.
>
> We recommended using the following, which have always been consensually
> approved:
>
> 1 = Homepage
> 3 = Site map
> 4 = Search
> 9 = Contact Us
> 0 = Accessibility
> s = Skip link
>
> No recommendations were provided as of yet regarding a multimedia player.
>
> Hoping this helps.
>
> [1] http://www.msg.gouv.qc.ca/normalisation/standards/accessibilite/
> --
> Denis Boudreau
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 2010-11-05, at 8:52 AM, Bruna Poletto Salton wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I always read all the messages from this list, but this is the first time
> > I'm actually asking something.
> >
> > I'm Brazilian and I'm working on the brazilian government accessibility
> > guidelines. We are not really sure if we should recommend the use of
> > accesskey in the brazilian government websites. Do people really use the
> > given shortcuts? Do they really work well?
> >
> > Thanks!!
> >
> > --
> > Bruna Poletto Salton
> > Projeto Acessibilidade Virtual da RENAPI | Núcleo Bento Gonçalves
> > (Virtual Accessibility Project)
> > www.bento.ifrs.edu.br/acessibilidade
> > (55) (54) 3455 3219
> >
From: Michael.Moore@dars.state.tx.us
Date: Tue, Nov 09 2010 7:00AM
Subject: Re: accesskey
← Previous message | Next message →
We use access keys on internal applications that people use frequently. That way they learn the access keys that they need. For externally facing sites we don't employ them due to the risk of overriding other keys. Internally we have full control over the browser, OS, and AT so we know which keys are still available.
Mike Moore
-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Bruna Poletto Salton
Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 6:50 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] accesskey
Thanks Denis.
This actually helped a lot. We believe that the shortcuts are a good thing.
All my blind co-workers really use them and expect that the website will
provide shortcuts.
But, there are some other people who think there's no need to offer
shortcuts. So, we're still discussing about this issue. I think it's gonna
take some time until we put a closure on this.
Thanks a lot.
Bruna Poletto Salton
Projeto Acessibilidade Virtual da RENAPI | Núcleo Bento Gonçalves
http://bento.ifrs.edu.br/acessibilidade
(55)(54) 3455 3219
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Denis Boudreau < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >wrote:
> Hi Bruna,
>
> We've asked ourselves the same question as we were developing the
> accessibility standards up north in Quebec[1]. Accesskey have always been a
> matter of religion: people are usually either for or against them.
>
> Given the discoverability issues related to accesskeys and the fact that an
> organization just cannot expect its users to learn/remember the special keys
> reserved on every website they visit, we decided that accesskeys would not
> be allowed on public websites at all.
>
> However, on intranets or applications (where people were expected to use
> them on a regular, if not daily basis), then accesskeys can certainly prove
> useful because users might be tempted to learn and remember them in order to
> improve their efficiency.
>
> Same logic went for multimedia players, because we expect to offer a
> standardized player for every government agency or organization. Relying on
> the same player and making sure it uses control keys can and actually
> proves, to be useful.
>
> We recommended using the following, which have always been consensually
> approved:
>
> 1 = Homepage
> 3 = Site map
> 4 = Search
> 9 = Contact Us
> 0 = Accessibility
> s = Skip link
>
> No recommendations were provided as of yet regarding a multimedia player.
>
> Hoping this helps.
>
> [1] http://www.msg.gouv.qc.ca/normalisation/standards/accessibilite/
> --
> Denis Boudreau
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 2010-11-05, at 8:52 AM, Bruna Poletto Salton wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I always read all the messages from this list, but this is the first time
> > I'm actually asking something.
> >
> > I'm Brazilian and I'm working on the brazilian government accessibility
> > guidelines. We are not really sure if we should recommend the use of
> > accesskey in the brazilian government websites. Do people really use the
> > given shortcuts? Do they really work well?
> >
> > Thanks!!
> >
> > --
> > Bruna Poletto Salton
> > Projeto Acessibilidade Virtual da RENAPI | Núcleo Bento Gonçalves
> > (Virtual Accessibility Project)
> > www.bento.ifrs.edu.br/acessibilidade
> > (55) (54) 3455 3219
> >
From: Accessibility India
Date: Tue, Nov 09 2010 7:06AM
Subject: Re: accesskey
← Previous message | Next message →
Hi Bruna,
My experience says that use of access keys is fine unless it does not
coinside with short-cuts of browsers, assistive technologies and
operating systems. Generally developers take care of all these but let
me quote an example where I have observed a coinside of accesskey of
the website and short-cut of assistive technology.
In the website "www.mail.com, if you login you will have an link to
calender. When we clikc on the calender we have options "Previous week
and next week".
This options are provided with short-cuts "Previous week control + alt
+ page-up, Next week with control + alt + page down, where as same
short - cuts are used in JAWS (screen reader) for increasing and
decreasing rate of speech speed.
Hope it helps.
On 11/9/10, = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
< = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> We use access keys on internal applications that people use frequently. That
> way they learn the access keys that they need. For externally facing sites
> we don't employ them due to the risk of overriding other keys. Internally we
> have full control over the browser, OS, and AT so we know which keys are
> still available.
>
> Mike Moore
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Bruna Poletto
> Salton
> Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 6:50 AM
> To: WebAIM Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] accesskey
>
> Thanks Denis.
>
> This actually helped a lot. We believe that the shortcuts are a good thing.
> All my blind co-workers really use them and expect that the website will
> provide shortcuts.
> But, there are some other people who think there's no need to offer
> shortcuts. So, we're still discussing about this issue. I think it's gonna
> take some time until we put a closure on this.
>
> Thanks a lot.
>
> Bruna Poletto Salton
> Projeto Acessibilidade Virtual da RENAPI | Núcleo Bento Gonçalves
> http://bento.ifrs.edu.br/acessibilidade
> (55)(54) 3455 3219
>
> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Denis Boudreau
> < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >wrote:
>
>> Hi Bruna,
>>
>> We've asked ourselves the same question as we were developing the
>> accessibility standards up north in Quebec[1]. Accesskey have always been
>> a
>> matter of religion: people are usually either for or against them.
>>
>> Given the discoverability issues related to accesskeys and the fact that
>> an
>> organization just cannot expect its users to learn/remember the special
>> keys
>> reserved on every website they visit, we decided that accesskeys would not
>> be allowed on public websites at all.
>>
>> However, on intranets or applications (where people were expected to use
>> them on a regular, if not daily basis), then accesskeys can certainly
>> prove
>> useful because users might be tempted to learn and remember them in order
>> to
>> improve their efficiency.
>>
>> Same logic went for multimedia players, because we expect to offer a
>> standardized player for every government agency or organization. Relying
>> on
>> the same player and making sure it uses control keys can and actually
>> proves, to be useful.
>>
>> We recommended using the following, which have always been consensually
>> approved:
>>
>> 1 = Homepage
>> 3 = Site map
>> 4 = Search
>> 9 = Contact Us
>> 0 = Accessibility
>> s = Skip link
>>
>> No recommendations were provided as of yet regarding a multimedia player.
>>
>> Hoping this helps.
>>
>> [1] http://www.msg.gouv.qc.ca/normalisation/standards/accessibilite/
>> --
>> Denis Boudreau
>> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2010-11-05, at 8:52 AM, Bruna Poletto Salton wrote:
>>
>> > Hi everyone,
>> >
>> > I always read all the messages from this list, but this is the first
>> > time
>> > I'm actually asking something.
>> >
>> > I'm Brazilian and I'm working on the brazilian government accessibility
>> > guidelines. We are not really sure if we should recommend the use of
>> > accesskey in the brazilian government websites. Do people really use the
>> > given shortcuts? Do they really work well?
>> >
>> > Thanks!!
>> >
>> > --
>> > Bruna Poletto Salton
>> > Projeto Acessibilidade Virtual da RENAPI | Núcleo Bento Gonçalves
>> > (Virtual Accessibility Project)
>> > www.bento.ifrs.edu.br/acessibilidade
>> > (55) (54) 3455 3219
>> >
From: Léonie Watson
Date: Tue, Nov 09 2010 7:27AM
Subject: Re: accesskey
← Previous message | Next message →
"My experience says that use of access keys is fine unless it does not coinside with short-cuts of browsers, assistive technologies and operating systems."
This is technically the case, but I'm not sure it reflects the way blind/partially sighted people perceive accesskeys. We did a straw poll of members of the British Computer Association of the Blind a while back, and most people said they disliked accesskeys, and ignored them in favour of their screen reader's native link handling functionality.
Regards,
Léonie.
--
Nomensa - humanising technology
Léonie Watson | Director of Accessibility
t. +44 (0)117 929 7333
-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Accessibility India
Sent: 09 November 2010 14:03
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] accesskey
Hi Bruna,
My experience says that use of access keys is fine unless it does not coinside with short-cuts of browsers, assistive technologies and operating systems. Generally developers take care of all these but let me quote an example where I have observed a coinside of accesskey of the website and short-cut of assistive technology.
In the website "www.mail.com, if you login you will have an link to calender. When we clikc on the calender we have options "Previous week and next week".
This options are provided with short-cuts "Previous week control + alt
+ page-up, Next week with control + alt + page down, where as same
short - cuts are used in JAWS (screen reader) for increasing and decreasing rate of speech speed.
Hope it helps.
On 11/9/10, = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> We use access keys on internal applications that people use
> frequently. That way they learn the access keys that they need. For
> externally facing sites we don't employ them due to the risk of
> overriding other keys. Internally we have full control over the
> browser, OS, and AT so we know which keys are still available.
>
> Mike Moore
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Bruna
> Poletto Salton
> Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 6:50 AM
> To: WebAIM Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] accesskey
>
> Thanks Denis.
>
> This actually helped a lot. We believe that the shortcuts are a good thing.
> All my blind co-workers really use them and expect that the website
> will provide shortcuts.
> But, there are some other people who think there's no need to offer
> shortcuts. So, we're still discussing about this issue. I think it's
> gonna take some time until we put a closure on this.
>
> Thanks a lot.
>
> Bruna Poletto Salton
> Projeto Acessibilidade Virtual da RENAPI | Núcleo Bento Gonçalves
> http://bento.ifrs.edu.br/acessibilidade
> (55)(54) 3455 3219
>
> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Denis Boudreau
> < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >wrote:
>
>> Hi Bruna,
>>
>> We've asked ourselves the same question as we were developing the
>> accessibility standards up north in Quebec[1]. Accesskey have always
>> been a matter of religion: people are usually either for or against
>> them.
>>
>> Given the discoverability issues related to accesskeys and the fact
>> that an organization just cannot expect its users to learn/remember
>> the special keys reserved on every website they visit, we decided
>> that accesskeys would not be allowed on public websites at all.
>>
>> However, on intranets or applications (where people were expected to
>> use them on a regular, if not daily basis), then accesskeys can
>> certainly prove useful because users might be tempted to learn and
>> remember them in order to improve their efficiency.
>>
>> Same logic went for multimedia players, because we expect to offer a
>> standardized player for every government agency or organization.
>> Relying on the same player and making sure it uses control keys can
>> and actually proves, to be useful.
>>
>> We recommended using the following, which have always been
>> consensually
>> approved:
>>
>> 1 = Homepage
>> 3 = Site map
>> 4 = Search
>> 9 = Contact Us
>> 0 = Accessibility
>> s = Skip link
>>
>> No recommendations were provided as of yet regarding a multimedia player.
>>
>> Hoping this helps.
>>
>> [1] http://www.msg.gouv.qc.ca/normalisation/standards/accessibilite/
>> --
>> Denis Boudreau
>> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2010-11-05, at 8:52 AM, Bruna Poletto Salton wrote:
>>
>> > Hi everyone,
>> >
>> > I always read all the messages from this list, but this is the
>> > first time I'm actually asking something.
>> >
>> > I'm Brazilian and I'm working on the brazilian government
>> > accessibility guidelines. We are not really sure if we should
>> > recommend the use of accesskey in the brazilian government
>> > websites. Do people really use the given shortcuts? Do they really work well?
>> >
>> > Thanks!!
>> >
>> > --
>> > Bruna Poletto Salton
>> > Projeto Acessibilidade Virtual da RENAPI | Núcleo Bento Gonçalves
>> > (Virtual Accessibility Project)
>> > www.bento.ifrs.edu.br/acessibilidade
>> > (55) (54) 3455 3219
>> >
From: Jared Smith
Date: Tue, Nov 09 2010 7:51AM
Subject: Re: accesskey
← Previous message | Next message →
The first WebAIM screen reader user survey showed very mixed results
for a question about access key usage -
http://webaim.org/projects/screenreadersurvey/#accesskeys As many
users always or often use access keys as never or seldom use them. The
difficulty is that unless you are in a closed environment, you can
never know the end user's shortcut keys to know whether you've created
a conflict.
Jared Smith
WebAIM
From: Cliff Tyllick
Date: Tue, Nov 09 2010 10:45AM
Subject: Re: accesskey
← Previous message | Next message →
Good point about the difficulty in knowing your user, Jared. Another point is that, even if you are in a closed environment, all you can know is the shortcut keys used by the users in that environment at that time. For example, if that environment is an intranet, the hiring of a new employee who needs a different form of AT from that used by your previous pool of employees could lead to a conflict between access keys.
And, conceivably, AT already in use could be improved with new features -- and new access keys to operate them -- which could also mess things up.
So even in a closed environment, the best you could say about your custom set of access keys is, "There are no conflicts for now."
Cliff Tyllick
Usability assessment coordinator
Agency Communications Division
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
512-239-4516
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>>> On 11/9/2010 at 8:48 AM, in message < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >, Jared Smith < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
The first WebAIM screen reader user survey showed very mixed results
for a question about access key usage -
http://webaim.org/projects/screenreadersurvey/#accesskeys As many
users always or often use access keys as never or seldom use them. The
difficulty is that unless you are in a closed environment, you can
never know the end user's shortcut keys to know whether you've created
a conflict.
Jared Smith
WebAIM
From: John Foliot
Date: Tue, Nov 09 2010 1:00PM
Subject: Re: accesskey
← Previous message | Next message →
Léonie,
Are those results public? I've long advocated against accesskeys as they
are implemented today, and having that kind of quantified data is very
useful. Are the results posted anywhere public?
Cheers!
JF
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto:webaim-forum-
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Léonie Watson
> Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 6:25 AM
> To: WebAIM Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] accesskey
>
> "My experience says that use of access keys is fine unless it does not
> coinside with short-cuts of browsers, assistive technologies and
> operating systems."
>
> This is technically the case, but I'm not sure it reflects the
> way blind/partially sighted people perceive accesskeys. We did a straw
> poll of members of the British Computer Association of the Blind a
> while back, and most people said they disliked accesskeys, and ignored
> them in favour of their screen reader's native link handling
> functionality.
>
> Regards,
> Léonie.
>
> --
> Nomensa - humanising technology
>
> Léonie Watson | Director of Accessibility
> t. +44 (0)117 929 7333
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto:webaim-forum-
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Accessibility India
> Sent: 09 November 2010 14:03
> To: WebAIM Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] accesskey
>
> Hi Bruna,
>
> My experience says that use of access keys is fine unless it does not
> coinside with short-cuts of browsers, assistive technologies and
> operating systems. Generally developers take care of all these but let
> me quote an example where I have observed a coinside of accesskey of
> the website and short-cut of assistive technology.
> In the website "www.mail.com, if you login you will have an link to
> calender. When we clikc on the calender we have options "Previous week
> and next week".
> This options are provided with short-cuts "Previous week control + alt
> + page-up, Next week with control + alt + page down, where as same
> short - cuts are used in JAWS (screen reader) for increasing and
> decreasing rate of speech speed.
>
> Hope it helps.
>
> On 11/9/10, = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> > We use access keys on internal applications that people use
> > frequently. That way they learn the access keys that they need. For
> > externally facing sites we don't employ them due to the risk of
> > overriding other keys. Internally we have full control over the
> > browser, OS, and AT so we know which keys are still available.
> >
> > Mike Moore
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Bruna
> > Poletto Salton
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 6:50 AM
> > To: WebAIM Discussion List
> > Subject: Re: [WebAIM] accesskey
> >
> > Thanks Denis.
> >
> > This actually helped a lot. We believe that the shortcuts are a good
> thing.
> > All my blind co-workers really use them and expect that the website
> > will provide shortcuts.
> > But, there are some other people who think there's no need to offer
> > shortcuts. So, we're still discussing about this issue. I think it's
> > gonna take some time until we put a closure on this.
> >
> > Thanks a lot.
> >
> > Bruna Poletto Salton
> > Projeto Acessibilidade Virtual da RENAPI | Núcleo Bento Gonçalves
> > http://bento.ifrs.edu.br/acessibilidade
> > (55)(54) 3455 3219
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Denis Boudreau
> > < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Bruna,
> >>
> >> We've asked ourselves the same question as we were developing the
> >> accessibility standards up north in Quebec[1]. Accesskey have always
> >> been a matter of religion: people are usually either for or against
> >> them.
> >>
> >> Given the discoverability issues related to accesskeys and the fact
> >> that an organization just cannot expect its users to learn/remember
> >> the special keys reserved on every website they visit, we decided
> >> that accesskeys would not be allowed on public websites at all.
> >>
> >> However, on intranets or applications (where people were expected to
> >> use them on a regular, if not daily basis), then accesskeys can
> >> certainly prove useful because users might be tempted to learn and
> >> remember them in order to improve their efficiency.
> >>
> >> Same logic went for multimedia players, because we expect to offer a
> >> standardized player for every government agency or organization.
> >> Relying on the same player and making sure it uses control keys can
> >> and actually proves, to be useful.
> >>
> >> We recommended using the following, which have always been
> >> consensually
> >> approved:
> >>
> >> 1 = Homepage
> >> 3 = Site map
> >> 4 = Search
> >> 9 = Contact Us
> >> 0 = Accessibility
> >> s = Skip link
> >>
> >> No recommendations were provided as of yet regarding a multimedia
> player.
> >>
> >> Hoping this helps.
> >>
> >> [1] http://www.msg.gouv.qc.ca/normalisation/standards/accessibilite/
> >> --
> >> Denis Boudreau
> >> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2010-11-05, at 8:52 AM, Bruna Poletto Salton wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi everyone,
> >> >
> >> > I always read all the messages from this list, but this is the
> >> > first time I'm actually asking something.
> >> >
> >> > I'm Brazilian and I'm working on the brazilian government
> >> > accessibility guidelines. We are not really sure if we should
> >> > recommend the use of accesskey in the brazilian government
> >> > websites. Do people really use the given shortcuts? Do they really
> work well?
> >> >
> >> > Thanks!!
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Bruna Poletto Salton
> >> > Projeto Acessibilidade Virtual da RENAPI | Núcleo Bento Gonçalves
> >> > (Virtual Accessibility Project)
> >> > www.bento.ifrs.edu.br/acessibilidade
> >> > (55) (54) 3455 3219
> >> >
From: Léonie Watson
Date: Thu, Nov 11 2010 1:48AM
Subject: Re: accesskey
← Previous message | No next message
"Are those results public? I've long advocated against accesskeys as they are implemented today, and having that kind of quantified data is very useful. Are the results posted anywhere public?"
No, unfortunately not. It was very much a quick straw poll, so we didn't really keep any of the results/notes to hand. It wouldn't be too difficult to run it again more formally though, I'll let you know if we do.
Regards,
Léonie.
--
Nomensa - humanising technology
Léonie Watson | Director of Accessibility
t. +44 (0)117 929 7333
-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of John Foliot
Sent: 09 November 2010 19:56
To: 'WebAIM Discussion List'
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] accesskey
Léonie,
Are those results public? I've long advocated against accesskeys as they are implemented today, and having that kind of quantified data is very useful. Are the results posted anywhere public?
Cheers!
JF
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto:webaim-forum-
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Léonie Watson
> Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 6:25 AM
> To: WebAIM Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] accesskey
>
> "My experience says that use of access keys is fine unless it does not
> coinside with short-cuts of browsers, assistive technologies and
> operating systems."
>
> This is technically the case, but I'm not sure it reflects the way
> blind/partially sighted people perceive accesskeys. We did a straw
> poll of members of the British Computer Association of the Blind a
> while back, and most people said they disliked accesskeys, and ignored
> them in favour of their screen reader's native link handling
> functionality.
>
> Regards,
> Léonie.
>
> --
> Nomensa - humanising technology
>
> Léonie Watson | Director of Accessibility
> t. +44 (0)117 929 7333
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = [mailto:webaim-forum-
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Accessibility India
> Sent: 09 November 2010 14:03
> To: WebAIM Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] accesskey
>
> Hi Bruna,
>
> My experience says that use of access keys is fine unless it does not
> coinside with short-cuts of browsers, assistive technologies and
> operating systems. Generally developers take care of all these but let
> me quote an example where I have observed a coinside of accesskey of
> the website and short-cut of assistive technology.
> In the website "www.mail.com, if you login you will have an link to
> calender. When we clikc on the calender we have options "Previous week
> and next week".
> This options are provided with short-cuts "Previous week control + alt
> + page-up, Next week with control + alt + page down, where as same
> short - cuts are used in JAWS (screen reader) for increasing and
> decreasing rate of speech speed.
>
> Hope it helps.
>
> On 11/9/10, = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> > We use access keys on internal applications that people use
> > frequently. That way they learn the access keys that they need. For
> > externally facing sites we don't employ them due to the risk of
> > overriding other keys. Internally we have full control over the
> > browser, OS, and AT so we know which keys are still available.
> >
> > Mike Moore
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Bruna
> > Poletto Salton
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 6:50 AM
> > To: WebAIM Discussion List
> > Subject: Re: [WebAIM] accesskey
> >
> > Thanks Denis.
> >
> > This actually helped a lot. We believe that the shortcuts are a good
> thing.
> > All my blind co-workers really use them and expect that the website
> > will provide shortcuts.
> > But, there are some other people who think there's no need to offer
> > shortcuts. So, we're still discussing about this issue. I think it's
> > gonna take some time until we put a closure on this.
> >
> > Thanks a lot.
> >
> > Bruna Poletto Salton
> > Projeto Acessibilidade Virtual da RENAPI | Núcleo Bento Gonçalves
> > http://bento.ifrs.edu.br/acessibilidade
> > (55)(54) 3455 3219
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Denis Boudreau
> > < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Bruna,
> >>
> >> We've asked ourselves the same question as we were developing the
> >> accessibility standards up north in Quebec[1]. Accesskey have
> >> always been a matter of religion: people are usually either for or
> >> against them.
> >>
> >> Given the discoverability issues related to accesskeys and the fact
> >> that an organization just cannot expect its users to learn/remember
> >> the special keys reserved on every website they visit, we decided
> >> that accesskeys would not be allowed on public websites at all.
> >>
> >> However, on intranets or applications (where people were expected
> >> to use them on a regular, if not daily basis), then accesskeys can
> >> certainly prove useful because users might be tempted to learn and
> >> remember them in order to improve their efficiency.
> >>
> >> Same logic went for multimedia players, because we expect to offer
> >> a standardized player for every government agency or organization.
> >> Relying on the same player and making sure it uses control keys can
> >> and actually proves, to be useful.
> >>
> >> We recommended using the following, which have always been
> >> consensually
> >> approved:
> >>
> >> 1 = Homepage
> >> 3 = Site map
> >> 4 = Search
> >> 9 = Contact Us
> >> 0 = Accessibility
> >> s = Skip link
> >>
> >> No recommendations were provided as of yet regarding a multimedia
> player.
> >>
> >> Hoping this helps.
> >>
> >> [1]
> >> http://www.msg.gouv.qc.ca/normalisation/standards/accessibilite/
> >> --
> >> Denis Boudreau
> >> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2010-11-05, at 8:52 AM, Bruna Poletto Salton wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi everyone,
> >> >
> >> > I always read all the messages from this list, but this is the
> >> > first time I'm actually asking something.
> >> >
> >> > I'm Brazilian and I'm working on the brazilian government
> >> > accessibility guidelines. We are not really sure if we should
> >> > recommend the use of accesskey in the brazilian government
> >> > websites. Do people really use the given shortcuts? Do they
> >> > really
> work well?
> >> >
> >> > Thanks!!
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Bruna Poletto Salton
> >> > Projeto Acessibilidade Virtual da RENAPI | Núcleo Bento Gonçalves
> >> > (Virtual Accessibility Project)
> >> > www.bento.ifrs.edu.br/acessibilidade
> >> > (55) (54) 3455 3219
> >> >