W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-eo-badtf@w3.org > September 2010

RE: a little bit of script testing?

From: Wilco Fiers <w.fiers@accessibility.nl>
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2010 11:12:34 +0200
To: Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>, Wilco Fiers <wfiers@bartimeus.nl>
CC: BAD TF <public-wai-eo-badtf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <7E0E35835EAF514AAAE44748A5EAAE2E0158D8E703F7@CPMBS-ZH01.kpneol.local>
Hello Shadi,

I suppose there are a few ways you could look at it. I tend to go by which element is most like what you want to do. Links point you to resources, so when I made the lightboxes with the annotations I used links because it points the user to a part of the content. For making changes in content such as expanding or collapsing I think buttons are the most elegant, because buttons are used for requesting a change, not some specific resource. Then again in things such as FAQs where you might use the question to expand the answer, that is already a lot more like a link then a button.

Personally I wouldn't use a checkbox (or it's role) because checkboxes are for inserting user information, not changing context. As a purely HTML component it doesn't do anything until we press the submit button. I would suggest disabling the button which can't be used. In the way you've done it you can't tell the state of the top buttons without CSS.

And here's the nitpicky point, technically when your paragraphs are collapsed, your heading shouldn't be headings anymore. For something to be a heading it requires some kind of content to come ofter it to which it can be a heading. Headings are only headings in relationship to content. If you remove the content, you should probably be removing the header markup too. Now I know that's quite fiddly and the reason why nobody does it. But it's something worth considering. The best solution to this I think is to use the default state - whatever it starts off as - to be correct, and to allow for semantic errors as the user interacts with the page. In your example that would mean not using the headers, but to use a list instead.

Hope this helps. Btw why did you use tabindex on the buttons? I can't really think of any need for them, could you clarify?

Regards,

Wilco
________________________________________
Van: Shadi Abou-Zahra [shadi@w3.org]
Verzonden: zondag 5 september 2010 15:49
Aan: Wilco Fiers
CC: BAD TF
Onderwerp: Fwd: a little bit of script testing?

Hi Wilco, BAD TF,

For your information, I am currently working on an expand/collapse
functionality similar to the one we've implemented for BAD [1].

Some of the comments we received relate to use of links rather than
buttons for the functionality. In particular, some argue that the
expand/collapse all should become a toggle rather than be a link.

Below you can find a test page in which I'm looking into using the
button elements with WAI-ARIA instead [2]. Any comments are welcome.

[1] <http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/PWD-Use-Web/2009/>
[2] <http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/PWD-Use-Web/2009/test.html>

Best,
   Shadi


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: a little bit of script testing?
Date: Sun, 05 Sep 2010 15:41:54 +0200
From: Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>

Hi folks,

Ref: <http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/PWD-Use-Web/2009/test.html>

Thank you for your feedback on the expand/collapse script so far. I'm
looking at some ways to improve its accessibility and would appreciate
if any of you can spare some additional time to do more testing.

The main changes are:
  - use of the button element rather than links, for all functions
  - use of WAI-ARIA roles and states to communicate what is happening
  - more descriptive button names to better communicate their purpose


Some known issues are:
  - the expand/collapse button still appears at the beginning of the
heading text rather than at the end. It is not a trivial task to get
this to happen across some particular browsers. Any suggestions or
tipps/tricks are highly welcome.
  - the visual styling will be looked at in more detail, especially to
make it more consistent across different browsers (buttons are quite
tricky in some browsers). Liam was suggesting the "silk" icons from
Famfamfam <http://www.famfamfam.com/>.


What I'm particularly looking for is:
  - how well does this functionality work with different browsers and
assistive technology (note that screen readers read aloud the button
names, types, and states differently, sometimes even when you use the
same screen reader but with different browsers).
  - how understandable and usable is the functionality, especially if
you imagine that you are working with it for the first time.


Any other comments or suggestions are welcome too.

Many thanks,
   Shadi

--
Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/ |
   WAI International Program Office Activity Lead   |
  W3C Evaluation & Repair Tools Working Group Chair |
Received on Monday, 6 September 2010 11:09:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 6 September 2010 11:09:54 GMT