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

RE: Accesskey consensus

From: Hoffman, Geoffrey <ghoffman@aztrib.com>
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 12:20:19 -0700
Message-ID: <078FF71625E8D4118DCB00902751365201E624CB@tribmail1.aztribune.com>
To: WAI-IG <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>

Joe Clark wrote:
> From Clagnut via Saila. As usual, all the interesting development is
> happening far removed from the corporate sector and is only ever
> published by indie sites. 
> 
> <http://www.clagnut.com/blog/193/#title>
> 
> It would not be difficult to expand Clagnut's survey of accesskey
> assignments with some simple Googling. In fact, many accessibility
> statements are copied and pasted from Pilgrim's, which seems to be a
> de facto standard in itself, and all of those, in my experience,
> include accesskey assignments.

I don't know if it will help anyone but I added some of my own research to
the above blog... couldn't find a list of 'reserved access keys' so I
created one. I've had a requirement on a past project where I had to have an
accesskey for every link on the page, so determining the maximum number of
accesskeys (and thus links per page in my app) that could be used on a
single page became somewhat critical. Unfortunately Safari wasn't available
at the time and I haven't looked into it, but I listed the reserved keys for
IE, NS, and Opera.

Geoff
Received on Friday, 23 May 2003 15:21:04 GMT

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