Re: I feel that the 2 sufficient techniques should be 'and' not 'or'.

I noticed something interesting based on a discussion thread started by
Sheena that talks about H69 being deficient, as it does not provide equal
access to sighted keyboard users.

Here is the issue and am quoting Sheena:

>> You've completely missed my point.  If H69 etc is used to pass this

>> criterion you are only helping screen reader users.

>>

>> What about those of us who navigate with the keyboard but are sighted, ie

>> do not use assistive technology of any sort?  Correct heading structure
is

>> of no benefit what-so-ever to us.

>>

>> If you don't want an AND, perhaps 2.4.1 should be split into two

>> requirements so that the first requirement is to provide a method for

>> keyboard users to bypass blocks and the second requirement is to provide
a

>> method for AT users to bypass blocks.  As we both know there is a
precedent

>> for splitting a single SC into various requirements - 1.4.8.



If one thinks about it, as the number of sighted keyboard users are going
to increase in the future, exposing the heading hierarchy only to screen
reader / magnifier users, and not to sighted keyboard users makes the H69
technique for SC 2.4.1 inadequate (
http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/navigation-mechanisms-skip.html).


Sailesh also posted a comment questioning the current usage of the H42
technique (SC 1.3.1:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20101014/H42), which is
excerpted below:
"... The technique is one and the same: proper use of headings. And it
serves two purposes and SCs. So merge the techniques into one instead of
running around in circles. I had suggested this in 2009. There are several
techniques that refer to  multiple SC. So I fail to understand your
resistance for this one."
Sailesh makes an interesting point about combining the two techniques into
a single technique, and have it refer to multiple SCs. It is less confusing
and more amenable. Why cannot we accomodate as many user groups (Assistive
Technology Users + Sighted Keyboard only users + Sighted users) as
possible, if we can?

A reference made by WCAG editors in using browser add-ons to achieve this,  is
asking a toyota yaris owner to buy a range rover to experience off
roading—as then only *well-equipped* sighted keyboard users will experience
the headings list. What about the rest?

I would recommend either creating a common sufficient technique or merging
the existing ones into one to include: **the tabindex=0 attribute on
headings**. This will allow users a sequential focus navigation, and with
added language taken from H42 and H69, make it more inclusive.

Any suggestions?

Thanks,

Devarshi