E-mail List Archives
Thread: Re: Sample Sites
Number of posts in this thread: 6 (In chronological order)
From: Kevin Spruill
Date: Fri, Aug 30 2002 2:41PM
Subject: Re: Sample Sites
No previous message | Next message →
What about keyboard accessibility? I notice that you don't use
tabindexing? Keep up the good work!
HK
Kevin Spruill
National Library of Medicine
OCCS
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
(301) 402-9708
(301) 402-0367 (fax)
www.nlm.nih.gov
>>> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = 08/30/02 03:53PM >>>
I have usually[*] done the 'jump to navigation' version.
I assume if someone came to a page they want to read what is on it. If
they don't, then I'll give them the option to jump to navigation. That
way if they are reading several pages linked together, they don't have
to jump over 15 navigation links.
[1] I had not done it for 1stpc.org... there, done... I love working
with PHP I also added an accesskey for navigation
Much better
TjL
--
30 Days to becoming an Opera Lover
http://www.tntluoma.com/opera/lover/
Day Five: As You Like It (customizing Opera)
http://www.tntluoma.com/opera/lover/day05-customize/
----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
From: Timothy J. Luoma
Date: Fri, Aug 30 2002 3:08PM
Subject: Re: Sample Sites
← Previous message | Next message →
Kevin Spruill wrote:
> What about keyboard accessibility?
I take it very seriously. In fact keyboard access is the only topic
getting 2 days worth of topics in the series below.
> I notice that you don't use tabindexing?
I don't change the default tab indexing true, but then again I've never
really found the need <em>for the sites that I have worked on</em>.
Maybe I'm missing something (well, I know I'm missing something,
probably lots of things... I can't wait to see Joe's book next
month!!!). I would think it would be disorienting to change the way
that tabs are handled.
Then again, I haven't played around with it all that much to see what
effect it has in different browsers. Which
> Keep up the good work!
Thanks, I'm trying.
We have a member of the congregation who is blind, as is the father of a
good friend of mine from college, I have a family member with epilepsy
which affects a whole host of cognitive responses, and so on.... The
first two are into the web big-time, and the second loves to see
pictures of our son, since we live far away, so these concerns are a bit
personal to me, but also I just like to be able to say that I design
sites better than most because 97.6% of the world seems ignorant of
standards and accessibility.
TjL
--
30 Days to becoming an Opera Lover
http://www.tntluoma.com/opera/lover/
Day Five: As You Like It (customizing Opera)
http://www.tntluoma.com/opera/lover/day05-customize/
----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
From: Emma Jane Hogbin
Date: Fri, Aug 30 2002 3:27PM
Subject: keyboard access [was Re: Sample Sites]
← Previous message | Next message →
>I take it very seriously. In fact keyboard access is the only topic
>getting 2 days worth of topics in the series below.
In the accessibility check points for the WAI, accesskeys aren't mentioned
until Priority Level 3.
http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/wai-pageauth.html#tech-keyboard-shortcuts
I would have thought this was something that was easy to do and should go
higher in the scale. Does anyone know how checkpoints are assigned to each
of the three levels? Does anyone think this item could (or should) be
Priority One or Two?
emma
--
Emma Jane Hogbin
[ 416 417 2868 ] [ = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] [ www.xtrinsic.com ]
----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
From: Paul Bohman
Date: Fri, Aug 30 2002 3:53PM
Subject: RE: keyboard access [was Re: Sample Sites]
← Previous message | Next message →
Part 1 of my message:
>Kevin Spruill asked: What about keyboard accessibility? I notice that
you don't use
tabindexing?
My comments:
As a general rule, it is not necessary to alter the default tab order of
the links or form fields. Most of the time, when a page is designed
well, the default tab order will be the most logical tab order.
When you change the default tab order, you run the risk of disorienting
users. For example, if a person starts to tab through the page, only to
discover that the focus jumps around in a different order than expected,
you may confuse the person. Similarly, a blind person may listen
straight through the page the first time, then begin to tab through the
links, expecting the links to be in the same order as the reading order.
Anything that has the potential to disorient the user should be avoided.
However, there are certainly circumstances when the best tab order is
not the same as the linear reading order. In my opinion, the tabindex
attribute *should* be used in these circumstances, but *only* in these
circumstances.
Part 2 of my message:
>Emma Jane Hogbin said: I would have thought [tabindex] was something
that was easy to do and should go higher in the scale. Does anyone know
how checkpoints are assigned to each of the three levels? Does anyone
think this item could (or should) be Priority One or Two?
My comments:
Checkpoints are given a level, or priority, based on the relative
"importance" or benefits that they offer to accessibility. Of course,
this is very subjective. Not everyone will agree that all of the
checkpoints have been assigned the correct priority. In fact, you could
argue that some of the level 3 checkpoints are necessary for some
people, and therefore could be considered priority 1 for these
individuals, even if these checkpoints are not necessary for people with
other types of disabilities.
In general, levels or priorities are not assigned based on ease of
compliance. As such, some level 3 items are easier to accomplish than
some level 1 or 2 items. If you look at the level 2 or 3 items and
decide that they're easy enough to incorporate into your design, then,
by all means, please do! There's nothing wrong with making your Web
pages more accessible! But, as I mentioned above, the tabindex attribute
is one that should only be applied when the default tab order is
inadequate.
Paul Bohman
Technology Coordinator
WebAIM (Web Accessibility in Mind)
www.webaim.org
Center for Persons with Disabilities
www.cpd.usu.edu
Utah State University
www.usu.edu
P.S. For those wondering what tabindex means, it is simply an attribute
that can be applied to links, form fields, and other elements. Web
authors can specify the exact order that these elements should be
accessed. Here is an example:
<a href="http://www.webaim.org" tabindex="2">WebAIM</a>
<a href="http://www.w3.org" tabindex="1">W3C</a>
In the above example, when the user tabs through the page, the first
link that the user will tab to will be the W3C link, because the
tabindex is set to "1", even though this particular link comes *after*
the link to WebAIM above it.
----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
From: Emma Jane Hogbin
Date: Fri, Aug 30 2002 4:17PM
Subject: RE: keyboard access [was Re: Sample Sites]
← Previous message | Next message →
>As a general rule, it is not necessary to alter the default tab order of
>the links or form fields. Most of the time, when a page is designed
>well, the default tab order will be the most logical tab order.
Oooops! I was actually thinking of accesskeys, not tab index! Sorry about
that. I agree that changing the tab index of a page can make it a little
confusing. The only time I can think of when I'd use it is on a form --
starting on the first element to fill in instead of the navigation....
>Checkpoints are given a level, or priority, based on the relative
>"importance" or benefits that they offer to accessibility. Of course,
>this is very subjective.
/nod/
>In general, levels or priorities are not assigned based on ease of
>compliance. As such, some level 3 items are easier to accomplish than
>some level 1 or 2 items.
This is nice to have confirmed. When I first started looking at the
checkpoints I thought they were meant to be in order of ease of
implementation. (Because it's pretty easy to add an alt attribute!)
Recently, however, I've been more and more aware of how hard (expensive?)
it can be to accomplish Priority One on a site with video clips.
emma :)
--
Emma Jane Hogbin
[ 416 417 2868 ] [ = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] [ www.xtrinsic.com ]
----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
From: Kynn Bartlett
Date: Tue, Sep 03 2002 3:44AM
Subject: Re: keyboard access [was Re: Sample Sites]
← Previous message | No next message
At 6:35 PM -0400 8/30/02, Emma Jane Hogbin wrote:
>I would have thought this was something that was easy to do and
>should go higher in the scale. Does anyone know how checkpoints are
>assigned to each of the three levels? Does anyone think this item
>could (or should) be Priority One or Two?
See other discussion, but in general, WCAG1 checkpoints don't correspond
to anything rational with regards to what you should or shouldn't do.
They are several abstraction levels away from that.
--Kynn
--
Kynn Bartlett < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > http://kynn.com
Chief Technologist, Idyll Mountain http://idyllmtn.com
Next Book: Teach Yourself CSS in 24 http://cssin24hours.com
Kynn on Web Accessibility ->> http://kynn.com/+sitepoint
----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/