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

RE: accessible navigation

From: John Foliot - bytown internet <foliot@bytowninternet.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 09:48:19 -0400
To: "Jim Ley" <jim@jibbering.com>, "W3c-Wai-Ig" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <GKEFJJEKDDIMBHJOGLENIEOFCIAA.foliot@bytowninternet.com>

Jim,

How about [title="Return to Top of Page"] and [title="Return to Site
Navigation"]?  This is essentially a "reverse" of the Section 508 "skip nav"
requirement.

JF

> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org]On
> Behalf Of Jim Ley
> Sent: July 12, 2002 9:31 AM
> To: W3c-Wai-Ig
> Subject: Re: accessible navigation
>
>
>
> "John Foliot - bytown internet" <foliot@bytowninternet.com>
> > > Though I understand how the client might not agree...
> > >
> >
> > How would a client not agree to making their site "better"?  Better for
> > those with disabilities sure, but also for older users (like their
> parents
> > perhaps?), inexperienced users, power users, etc.  Having these links
> adds
> > options to each page and improves navigation
>
> I don't entirely agree, if you have a link at the bottom of the page
> saying "to the content" or "to the navigation" I am confused, I've just
> read the content and now there's a link to some more content, or is it
> the same content or what? similarly with the navigation, new navigation,
> different navigation I think the link text here is important to the
> issue, and no-one's suggested what that might be.
>
> Jim.
>
Received on Friday, 12 July 2002 09:48:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:05 GMT