W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2001

RE: Frame Title and Screenreader Access

From: Jim Thatcher <thatch@attglobal.net>
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 10:45:18 -0600
To: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Cc: Laurie Harrison <laurie.harrison@utoronto.ca>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Message-id: <NDBBKJDAKKEJDCICIODLCEHCCNAA.thatch@attglobal.net>
Charles,

When you say <quote> it is  useful to have a name attribute that is at least
meaningful, and a title attribute that takes advantage of  the fact that you
can have several words in it. <end quote> I think it is important to ask
"useful to whom." It isn't useful to the web developer to have to add two
attributes. It isn't useful to the assistive technology developer because
they are faced with the decision of which to speak. Speaking both is
redundant and "noisy." So add a user choice in the AT! There are far too
many switches, and even with the switch, when is a user to decide to choose
one over the other?

It is so much better for all when there is one clear choice better for the
web developer, AT developer and user.

Jim
jim@jimthatcher.com
Accessibility Consulting
http://jimthatcher.com
512-306-0931

-----Original Message-----
From: Charles McCathieNevile [mailto:charles@w3.org]
Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2001 8:30 PM
To: jim@jimthatcher.com
Cc: Laurie Harrison; w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Subject: RE: Frame Title and Screenreader Access


I essentially agree with Jim's recommendation, but it is  useful to have a
name attribute that is at least meaningful, and a title attribute that takes
advantage of  the fact that you can have several words in it. (The key word
should of course be the same). In addition you should use the noframes
element, as per the HTML specification, to provide navigation links into
your
content for browsers which do not render each frame.

I will take an action item to propose an update to the techniques for WCAG.

Further comments below

On Sat, 17 Feb 2001, Jim Thatcher wrote:

  Laurie,

  (1) Here's WCAG: 12.1 Title each frame to facilitate frame identification
  and navigation. [Priority 1] For example, in HTML use the "title"
attribute
  on FRAME elements.

CMN Here's where WCAG points for techniques to do this:
http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-HTML-TECHS/#frame-names (Please note that every
checkpoint in WCAG 1.0 has a link to techniques. In most cases there is
further useful information both at the point and  often just around it).
Essentially the examle given here uses title on the frame element in the
frameset. As Jim points out below, that probably isn't enough to work well
everywhere.

--Charles McCN
JT  continued
  (2) Section 508 used the WCAG wording without the example.

  Here is my analysis of how well assistive technology is listening to the
  these recommendations.

  (1) Lynx, which is not assistive technology, really, uses the name
  attributes on the frame elements for its list of frames.

  (2) HomePage Reader v2.5 used the title attribute on the frame element if
it
  was present but reverted to the title element of the actual frame page if
  there was no title attribute. I know of no other AT that uses/used the
title
  attribute.

  (3) Jaws uses the name attribute of the frame element for its list of
  frames, and announces both the name attribute and the title element as it
  reads the frame.

  (4) Window-Eyes only uses only the title element. I don't know if
  Window-Eyes provides a list of frames.

  (5) HPR v3.0 uses the title element of each frame page in its list of
  frames; it uses neither the name nor the title attribute. (This is a bug,
in
  my opinion!)

  The only conclusion I can make is to recommend to web authors is provide
  both title and name attributes on the frame elements (make them the same)
  and quality titles on their frame pages. In other words do all three and
  your bases will be covered. Of course the name and title attributes
describe
  the purpose of the frame, like "main content" or "local navigation."
Received on Sunday, 18 February 2001 11:44:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:53 GMT