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

RE: New Window inform

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 10:32:44 -0400 (EDT)
To: Steve Vosloo <stevenvosloo@yahoo.com>
cc: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0209131028160.2086-100000@tux.w3.org>

Actually my preference is for option 3. It is possible in most windowing
browsers to open a link in a new window anyway. I suspect even emacspeak can
do this.

For option (2), although not all browsers make the title attribute available,
many more do than tell the user that a link opens a new window. So the
argument that you satisfied this because you did half and the browser did
half of it's share seems stronger.

(checking what happens in individual browsers and being able to back up the
argument would help - anyone have some data already?)

Otherwise I would go with (1).

That's my 2 cents worth. If you have the data for 2 you could propose the
argument to the WCAG working group as a technique for WCAG which has support
in browsers...

cheers

Chaals

On Fri, 13 Sep 2002, Steve Vosloo wrote:

>
>You're totally right -- it's not a perfect solution. But so far no one
>has stepped up to the microphone and shown the way.
>
>Perhaps if there is no perfect solution we should choose the least messy
>one. To recap here are the options:
>
>1) Provide a warning in the link itself, e.g. "MS.com (link opens a new
>window)"
>
>The downside: if your browser does provide a warning you'll hear "link
>opens a new window" twice. Not the end of the world.
>
>Also, some browsers which extract links from a page don't actually open
>that link in a new window. These users are probably used to the nuances
>of their browsers and probably wouldn't be totally thrown out by this
>"mistake". Hell, they might even think "These guys are trying to make a
>WAI level-AA compliant site. That's cool!"
>
>2) Provide a warning near the link, e.g. in the TITLE attribute.
>
>Downside: TITLE is not universally supported so the users who need to
>know this snippet of information most might not get it.
>
>3) Don't ever provide popups or open new browser windows.
>
>The downside ... Depends on the site.
>
>What do you guys think? In the inclusive and universal spirit of
>accessibility option 1 might be a step in the right direction?
>
>Steve
>
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Harry Woodrow [mailto:harrry@email.com]
>> Sent: 13 September 2002 03:19 PM
>> To: 'Steve Vosloo'; w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
>> Subject: RE: New Window inform
>>
>>
>> Just a thought...even if JAWS etc tell the user can we be
>> sure that people who are using braile readers and other forms
>> of display also get warned.  After all the SOCOG Case was
>> taken by a gentleman who used one of these and there are many others.
>>
>> Harry Woodrow
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org
>> [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Steve Vosloo
>> Sent: Friday, 13 September 2002 9:03 PM
>> To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
>> Subject: RE: New Window inform
>>
>>
>> Thanks John and Charles. I'm auditing a client's site so I
>> have to make suggestions. If it was my site I'd simply remove
>> all popups. But my role is to advise on the options available.
>>
>> Both your viewpoints of sticking to the guidelines make
>> sense. If you say it, mean it. For me the frustration is a
>> lack of working examples accompanying the guidelines. No one
>> on this list or on the WebAIM list
>> -- and we have world experts in the field of accessibility on
>> these lists -- has given a happy solution to this.
>>
>> I'll rephrase a previous question to the list: do JAWS,
>> WindowsEyez or IBM Home Page Reader warn the user about a new
>> window/popup? If these do then the case for UA's doing the
>> job is solid. The checkpoint says that a warning must be
>> issued -- if the UA does it then surely the site doesn't have to.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: John Foliot - bytown internet
>> > [mailto:foliot@bytowninternet.com]
>> > Sent: 13 September 2002 02:31 PM
>> > To: Steve Vosloo; w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
>> > Subject: RE: New Window inform
>> >
>> >
>> > Steve,
>> >
>> > If you want the "conformance" tag to have any real
>> > "authority", then fudging sections of it seems inappropriate to me.
>> >
>> > 	"All Animals are created equal, some are just more
>> > equal than others..." (to paraphrase George Orwell).
>> >
>> > W3C Priority 1, 6.3: "Ensure that pages are usable when
>> > scripts, applets, or other programmatic objects are turned
>> > off or not supported. If this is not possible, provide
>> > equivalent information on an alternative accessible page."
>> > (Most often, the launching of a pop-up window invokes a
>> > JavaScript call [which often opens a window with a fixed
>> > width and height].  If JavaScript is not enabled, then what?
>> > Yes, you can spawn a new window using the target="_blank"
>> > attribute, but this introduces it's own issues as well,
>> > including resource issues, spatial disorientation for those
>> > with cognitive disabilities, etc.  How many new users, not
>> > aware that they have spawned a new browser, become frustrated
>> > that their "Back" button isn't working?)
>> >
>> > W3C Priority 2, 10.1: "Until user agents allow users to turn
>> > off spawned windows, do not cause pop-ups or other windows to
>> > appear and do not change the current window without informing
>> > the user." (Now it can be argued that users *can* turn off
>> > pop-up windows [using applications like "pop-up-cop", etc. or
>> > via their preferences settings - such as in Opera], but then
>> > the content is not accessible...)
>> >
>> > My feelings on this have been aired before - if you say it,
>> > means it!  Since some user agents cannot handle pop-up
>> > windows, including them for ANY reason introduces possible
>> > accessibility/usability problems.  Not knowing your site, or
>> > your situation, I cannot say that your action cannot be
>> > acheived in another way, but I can suggest you try.
>> >
>> > Cheers!
>> >
>> > JF
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org
>> [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org]On
>> > > Behalf Of Steve Vosloo
>> > > Sent: September 13, 2002 6:20 AM
>> > > To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
>> > > Subject: RE: New Window inform
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > In summary, some user agents that create a list of links
>> > for a page do
>> > > not open those links in pop-up or new windows, so including the
>> > > warning as part of the link would not be correct. Other
>> user agents
>> > > automatically inform the user of pop-up or new windows, so
>> > including
>> > > the warning as part of the link would result in a double
>> > description,
>> > > e.g.
>> > > "Link: Microsoft, opens in a new window. Link opens a new browser
>> > > window."
>> > >
>> > > Until a workable solution is found, it seems the best is to
>> > leave it
>> > > up to the user agent to inform the user of a pop-up or new window.
>> > >
>> > > If we have good motivation for an action, as above, do you
>> > feel that
>> > > one can still award Level-AA compliance even though this
>> checkpoint
>> > > has not been strictly adhered to?
>> > >
>> > > Steve
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > > From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org
>> > [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org]
>> > > > On Behalf Of Lloyd G. Rasmussen
>> > > > Sent: 10 September 2002 09:14 PM
>> > > > To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
>> > > > Subject: Re: New Window inform
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > A Windows user can go into the Start, Settings, Control Panel,
>> > > > Sounds applet and assign sounds  or earcons to the
>> "open program"
>> > > > and "close program" events.  Good sound effects are in
>> the Utopia
>> > > > and Robots sound schemes.  While there, assign the
>> > "program error"
>> > > > sound from the Robots scheme to program errors, and you
>> > have a crash
>> > > > which really sounds like a crash.
>> > > >
>> > > > These earcons don't warn you that a new window is about
>> > to open, but
>> > > > tell you when your actions or the actions of an
>> > advertisement have
>> > > > opened another window.  The annoying thing is that, in
>> > your effort
>> > > > to close various windows, you will end up closing too
>> > many and end
>> > > > your browsing session prematurely.
>> > > >
>> > > > I would not put a warning inside a hyperlink.  Perhaps
>> just after
>> > > > it.
>> > > >
>> > > > At 09:19 PM 9/9/02 +0100, you wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > >> Does anyone know which user agents don't warn the
>> user about a
>> > > > >> new window/popup?
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >
>> > > > >There is only one user agent these days, as far as most
>> > people are
>> > > > >concerned, and it doesn't.
>> > > > >
>> > > > >In practice, no mass market browser is going to warn people
>> > > > by default
>> > > > >as those authors not forced to obey Section 508 would not
>> > > > stand for its
>> > > > >getting in the way of their designs.
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > Braille is the solution to the digital divide.
>> > > > Lloyd Rasmussen, Senior Staff Engineer
>> > > > National Library Service f/t Blind and Physically Handicapped
>> > > > Library of Congress    (202) 707-0535  <lras@loc.gov>
>> > > > <http://www.loc.gov/nls>
>> > > > HOME:  <lras@sprynet.com>       <http://lras.home.sprynet.com>
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>> ---
>> Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
>> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>> Version: 6.0.386 / Virus Database: 218 - Release Date: 9/09/2002
>>
>>
>> ---
>> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
>> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>> Version: 6.0.386 / Virus Database: 218 - Release Date: 9/09/2002
>>
>>
>

-- 
Charles McCathieNevile  http://www.w3.org/People/Charles  tel: +61 409 134 136
SWAD-E http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe ------------ WAI http://www.w3.org/WAI
 21 Mitchell street, FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia  fax(fr): +33 4 92 38 78 22
 W3C, 2004 Route des Lucioles, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Friday, 13 September 2002 10:32:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:06 GMT