WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Thread: Headings and Navigation Areas

for

Number of posts in this thread: 3 (In chronological order)

From: LSnider
Date: Sat, Jan 14 2012 2:00PM
Subject: Headings and Navigation Areas
No previous message | Next message →

Hi Everyone,

I wanted to hear the collective wisdom on a site I just saw. It had the
usual design, banner, two navigation areas (one horizontally at the top and
one vertically on the left), search area on the left side and a main
content area. The developers have used headings this way:

The title above the content is a H1-that is fine.
Then they gave H2 headings to the primary and secondary navigation areas
and search area. These H2s are invisible to sighted viewers.

Do you use headings this way? Or do you use them just for content areas?

Cheers

Lisa

From: Birkir R. Gunnarsson
Date: Sat, Jan 14 2012 3:30PM
Subject: Re: Headings and Navigation Areas
← Previous message | Next message →

Hi

Just chiming in as a user.
I often use "h" to navigate throughheadings when discovering a new
page. I don't like multiple h1s on the page, I just want a single h1
elemnt on that pgae, one that takes me to the main area of the page.
The other thing I likeis consistency in headings, in other words, that
groupsoflinks or parts of a page have the same level headings, be it
h2, h3 or some other level.
I don't like, say, the navigation area to be h2, the "contact us" area
to be an h3 and so on.
Good exampes is, for instance, www.nhl.com/scores .. at night (EST)
there are tables for each on-going game with the live scores updated,
"on-going" "final" and "news" are the main sections and they are all
h3, so I can easily jump between them. I am a big fan of this typeof
navigation as long as it is consistent.
That being said, for a page like you describe, I'd recommend using
ARIA, I find myself using ARIA increasingly whenit is available to
jump to "main" "search" etc. Often it is a bit awkward to have a
separate and unique heading for "search" which generally is just one
edit field with a button, and possible some menus for sarch options.
The search landmark works very well for this, barring that using the
"e" key to find an edit field will also do the trick, almost seems
like a bitof waste of headings (unless these provide benefits for
non-screenreader users".
hth, or at least gives you a perspective.
-B

On 1/14/12, LSnider < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I wanted to hear the collective wisdom on a site I just saw. It had the
> usual design, banner, two navigation areas (one horizontally at the top and
> one vertically on the left), search area on the left side and a main
> content area. The developers have used headings this way:
>
> The title above the content is a H1-that is fine.
> Then they gave H2 headings to the primary and secondary navigation areas
> and search area. These H2s are invisible to sighted viewers.
>
> Do you use headings this way? Or do you use them just for content areas?
>
> Cheers
>
> Lisa
>

From: LSnider
Date: Sat, Jan 14 2012 4:30PM
Subject: Re: Headings and Navigation Areas
← Previous message | No next message

Hi Birkir,

Thanks for your feedback, I appreciate it. Interesting about the ARIA, I
will have to look into that route...

So do you as a screen reader user like to see headings used for navigation
areas (as long as things are consistent as you said below)? I can see
headings being useful for content areas (like the NHL site below)...but for
navigation areas, does that help you or does it confuse? I usually use
headings for content areas only, and am wondering if I should add them to
the navigation areas as well...

Cheers

Lisa


On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 2:32 PM, Birkir R. Gunnarsson <
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:

> Hi
>
> Just chiming in as a user.
> I often use "h" to navigate throughheadings when discovering a new
> page. I don't like multiple h1s on the page, I just want a single h1
> elemnt on that pgae, one that takes me to the main area of the page.
> The other thing I likeis consistency in headings, in other words, that
> groupsoflinks or parts of a page have the same level headings, be it
> h2, h3 or some other level.
> I don't like, say, the navigation area to be h2, the "contact us" area
> to be an h3 and so on.
> Good exampes is, for instance, www.nhl.com/scores .. at night (EST)
> there are tables for each on-going game with the live scores updated,
> "on-going" "final" and "news" are the main sections and they are all
> h3, so I can easily jump between them. I am a big fan of this typeof
> navigation as long as it is consistent.
> That being said, for a page like you describe, I'd recommend using
> ARIA, I find myself using ARIA increasingly whenit is available to
> jump to "main" "search" etc. Often it is a bit awkward to have a
> separate and unique heading for "search" which generally is just one
> edit field with a button, and possible some menus for sarch options.
> The search landmark works very well for this, barring that using the
> "e" key to find an edit field will also do the trick, almost seems
> like a bitof waste of headings (unless these provide benefits for
> non-screenreader users".
> hth, or at least gives you a perspective.
> -B
>
> On 1/14/12, LSnider < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> > Hi Everyone,
> >
> > I wanted to hear the collective wisdom on a site I just saw. It had the
> > usual design, banner, two navigation areas (one horizontally at the top
> and
> > one vertically on the left), search area on the left side and a main
> > content area. The developers have used headings this way:
> >
> > The title above the content is a H1-that is fine.
> > Then they gave H2 headings to the primary and secondary navigation areas
> > and search area. These H2s are invisible to sighted viewers.
> >
> > Do you use headings this way? Or do you use them just for content areas?
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Lisa
> >