W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2000

RE: Request for site review

From: Jim Thatcher <thatch@attglobal.net>
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 10:03:00 -0500
To: Bruce Bailey <bbailey@clark.net>, Web Accessibility Initiative <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-id: <NDBBKJDAKKEJDCICIODLOEKICAAA.thatch@attglobal.net>
Bruce,

I suppose the sub-menu popup links are a text-only idea, but I stick to
the idea that this is both sensible and good - except for the
serious navigation problem on the sub-menu page.

When using menus in ordinary software, the screen reader user must
actively say I want to see the submenu. That is the correct behavior.
You would hate to be taken into every sub-menu as you went down a
main menu with speech. The mouse user, on the other hand, has the
advantage of having sub-menus appear as you move down the menu
with the mouse, just as with sailor. Lucky him! It is imperative
that the speech user choose to hear the submenu.

As for number of steps, you indicated,
<blockquote>
Current page, using onMouseOver:
Home Page -> onMouseOver sub-menu -> Target Page (one "click")

Current page, using screen reader or keyboard: (two "clicks")
Home Page -> sub-menu page -> Target Page
</blockquote>
But the mouseover must be considered an action. The user does do
something. The number of actions is the same -

Find main menu item
bring up submenu
find sub-menu item
open target page

Everyone must take these steps. If you can see it is easier.

I hold to the position that navigation on the submenu page is a
problem, a solvable problem, but the page passes muster in my
opinion.

Jim
jim@jimthatcher.com
512-306-0931

-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org]On
Behalf Of Bruce Bailey
Sent: Friday, April 14, 2000 8:39 AM
To: jim@jimthatcher.com; Web Accessibility Initiative
Subject: RE: Request for site review


Dear Jim,

Thanks for your comments.

I didn't spot any links that were in onMouseOver content that were more than
one page away from the home page.  (1) My personal prejudice is strongly
against "text-only parallel sites" because (a) they really shouldn't be
necessary, (b) they are rarely truly parallel, (c) it fosters acceptance of
the idea of a "disability ghetto".  (2)  I don't see that an alternative
homepage, if that's all that is needed, would make things any better for a
screen reader user.

Current page, using onMouseOver:
Home Page -> onMouseOver sub-menu -> Target Page (one "click")

Current page, using screen reader or keyboard: (two "clicks")
Home Page -> sub-menu page -> Target Page

Alternative home page:
Home Page -> "text-only" page -> Target Page (two "clicks")

What is the advantage?  Add to this the problem that the "text-only" page
would have about five times the number of links as the current home page, it
could actually be LESS function than the current two-tiered version.

I think Sailor is not in trouble with onMouseOver content ONLY because the
sub-menu pages are already well developed.  If they did not have those, they
would have to be building the them from scratch, and that WOULD be a fair
amount of work.

I think they will be moving the Infotract / Sun Spot / GPO etc. menu up
higher on the page.  Is that what you were referring to as a navigation bar?

--
Thank you.
Bruce

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Thatcher [mailto:thatch@attglobal.net]
> Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2000 7:41 PM
> To: Bruce Bailey; Web Accessibility Initiative
> Subject: RE: Request for site review
>
>
> Bruce,
>
> I don't understand why you say the duplicate content won't help
> lynx or screen reader users. The sub-menu a mouse user sees as the result
> of the mouseover is on the page you get by following (clicking) the topic.
> It is complete equivalent content as far as I am concerned.
>
> If you were to add "skip navigation" it would be equivalent access as
> well. That sub-menu is so simple, but one has to wander through all the
> navigation stuff to find the simple menu at what turns out to be the
> bottom of the page.
>
> Jim
> Jim@Jimthatcher.com
> 512-306-0931
>
Received on Friday, 14 April 2000 11:02:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:48 GMT