W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2004

RE: [#832] Clear link text - priority and acceptability of supplemental text

From: Lisa Seeman <seeman@netvision.net.il>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 07:01:54 +0300
To: 'Gregg Vanderheiden' <gv@trace.wisc.edu>, "'WAI GL (E-mail)'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-id: <016f01c4580d$ab3edf60$340aa8c0@lisaibm>

> Where [click here] is the link.   This is not good form but 
> it does not make
> the page unusable. 

Well I think it  might in some cases. For example, 

case 1 : Unusable? -  the link more that in the flow of the page is
sandwiched between two different stories. Visually, duy to the layout it
is "obvious" that it refers to the second story, but the screen reader
user will not have a way to tell where the link goes.

if the page does not have a logical linerized reading order then the
problem is worse. I have heard a page read : link more, link more link
more link more.


Case 2: Hard to use- a fast way to scan a site and read it in a non
linerized way is tabbing though the links.
It is also a way to build a page map or table of content of a site. That
speeds up browsing a lot. 

However , as with so many criteria (if not all) sometimes is not
relevant or helpful. For example,  when "click hear" is inserted inside
a sentence that gives it context case 1 falls away.

If you have headings followed consistently by a short link "example"
then that might be more useful the a long link

For example <h1>provide text equivalents</h1><A ..>example</a>
is, in my opinion, clear for both cases as you can tab through heading
if you give them a tab order
and this case is simpler to read then
<h1>provide text equivalents</h1><A ..>example of providing text
equivalents </a>




> 

> 
>  
> Gregg
> 
>  -- ------------------------------ 
> Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
> Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
> Director - Trace R & D Center 
> University of Wisconsin-Madison 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: david poehlman [mailto:poehlman1@comcast.net] 
> Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 7:36 PM
> To: Gregg Vanderheiden; 'Michael Cooper'; 'WAI GL (E-mail)'
> Cc: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
> Subject: Re: [#832] Clear link text - priority and 
> acceptability of supplemental text
> 
> is it not a barrier to use of the web if clear links are 
> needed from a cognative point of view?
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Gregg Vanderheiden" <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
> To: "'Michael Cooper'" <michaelc@watchfire.com>; "'WAI GL 
> (E-mail)'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> Cc: <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
> Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 6:26 PM
> Subject: RE: [#832] Clear link text - priority and 
> acceptability of supplement al text
> 
> 
> 
> Clear link text means that the text that is visible on the 
> page needs to be clear - yes? This would be a type V 
> guidelines since it would specify how the page would look in 
> its default presentation.
> 
> Also - is this a crucial barrier to use of the web -- or just 
> good design.
> 
> Since I don't see this as a bar to use of the web - it would 
> fall in level 2 or 3.
> 
> Gregg
> 
>  -- ------------------------------ 
> Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
> Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
> Director - Trace R & D Center
> University of Wisconsin-Madison
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf > Of Michael 
> Cooper
> Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 3:35 PM
> To: WAI GL (E-mail)
> Cc: 'w3c-wai-ua@w3.org'
> Subject: [#832] Clear link text - priority and acceptability 
> of supplement al text
> 
> 
> The requirement to make clear link text is currently a Level 
> 3 success criterion [1]. In my opinion this should be a level 
> 1. In discussion with the techniques task force, we thought 
> it might be a level 3 because of the possibility to use 
> supplemental text to clarify the link (e.g., the "title" 
> attribute in HTML). But for that to work, we need to know 
> that the supplemental text will be presented to the user when 
> needed. But the UAAG [2] does not provide a single mandate 
> for how this is to be accomplished, and further permits 
> supplemental text to be presented instead of the orginal 
> text, not just alongside. We are unsure of the implications 
> of this for the clear link text requirement and the use of 
> the "title" attribute to fulfill that requirement in HTML.
> 
> I propose that the requirement for clear link text be moved 
> to level 1. Specific mechanisms for achieving that should be 
> left to technology-specific techniques, though it would be 
> useful if the guidelines would comment on the role of 
> features like the "title" attribute in HTML for meeting this 
> requirement. This may require coordination with the User Agent group.
> 
> [1]
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-20040602.html#consis
tent-behavior-
target-identified
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/UAAG10/guidelines.html#tech-conditional-content

--- Signature ---

Michael Cooper
Accessibility Product Manager, Watchfire
1 Hines Rd Suite 200, Kanata, ON  K2K 3C7  Canada
Tel: +1 (613) 599-3888 x4019
Fax: +1 (613) 599-4661
Email: michaelc@watchfire.com
Web: http://www.watchfire.com/
Received on Tuesday, 22 June 2004 00:02:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:30 GMT