W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2002

Re: speech only links

From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 09:24:03 -0500
Message-Id: <200203181424.JAA1228352@smtp2.mail.iamworld.net>
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
At 01:14 PM 2002-03-17 , Seth Rothberg wrote:
>Hi,
>
>First off, apologies if this has been discussed ad nauseum on this list. I've 
>no idea where the archives are kept. If you can point me there I'll gladly 
>shut up and do my homework.

[Don't stop asking questions here.  

But for the times when you want to search the archives first, consider


http://www.google.com/search?q=w3c-wai-ig@w3.org

http://www.google.com/search?q=your+question

http://www.google.com/search?q=w3c-wai-ig@w3.org+your+question

]
>
>I've been trying to come up with a more elegant way of presenting screen 
>reader only links than using the anchored1px transparent gif with alt text 
>trick, which works but strikes me as an ugly hack. 
>
>What I want to do is use a style sheet to accomplish something like this.
>
>.speechlinks { display: none }
>
>Now, I know that this means that anything  .speechlinks  should be hidden 
>from all user agents. However, I'm wondering if overiding like so,
>
>@media aural { .speechlinks { display: block; } }
>
>would be effective and proper. Right now I can tell you that Home Page Reader 
>pays attention to the first rule but ignores the rule in @media aural. 
>Haven't tested this in my JAWS demo yet but I'm assuming from past experience 
>that JAWS just ignores my stylesheets anyway.
>
>Is this a technique whose time has not yet come? Or should I be waving 
>garlic, holy water and crosses at pages that try it?
>

There are still going to be problems with implementation of the logic in the style implementations.  But there is a prior problem.  Your statement of the page functionality you are trying for is backwards.  You can simplify the stylesheet logic and clean up your functionality at the same time.

The idea of "speech-only links" is ethically repugnant.  What lies are you telling the speech user that you are unwilling to have someone else be told?

Under the current draft User Agent Guidelines [Guideline 2, particularly Checkpoint 2.3] this content has to be discoverable by any user whether you thought they would want it or not.

Think in terms of "screen-only hiding" instead, as an optional optimization, and you will get the stylesheet logic right and understand the authoring groundrules for these links.  These links are to be valid, but OK to hide under some circumstances.  Not _only applicable_ under some circumstances.  You want

@media screen ... display: none

not 

@media aural  ... display: some

This is the logic for fail-soft design.  The content is valid content and the hiding is a hint, a situation-specific default optimization.  Then you're OK.

Al

>Thanks,
>Seth
> 
Received on Monday, 18 March 2002 09:24:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:01 GMT