W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2003

Re: WCAG versus Bobby for site review?

From: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 07:21:39 +0100 (BST)
Message-Id: <200305010621.h416Le502574@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org

> would be moer clear, like "link", but doesn't the unique title suffice 
> the requirement for WCAG?

Many browsers don't provide good access to titles.

What this rule is trying to ensure is that you can skip read the text
looking just at the links.  In particular, it is trying to avoid
the common "click here" idiom and create true hypertext.  It's somewhat
like the use of label for form controls; the common idiom "click here", is
really just another sort of form control (without a form!), whereas
the intention of anchors was that the label should double for the
control.

Another example of use is that, in Lynx, it is very easy to do 
a text search (there are reports that this is easy in Mozilla),
so, with uniquely labelled links, one can type:

/<link text><return>

and find and follow the link much faster than is often possible in
GUI mode with a mouse.  That just doesn't work when every link is
called "click here".

I'm not completely clear what you are trying to do, but having text
that is serial numbered doesn't help the user, and is just defeating
the checker.

If there is a need for secondary links, the language and browsers really
need to be enhanced to support them, rather than just using a graphical
convention.  This is essentially the distinciton between a D link and
a properly implemented longdesc attribute, and, unfortunately indicates
that browser support may never come.
Received on Thursday, 1 May 2003 16:17:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:09 GMT