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

Re: Frames and Accessibility

From: Julian Voelcker <asp@tvw.net>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 17:33:33 GMT
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Message-Id: <VA.00000624.03d93716@tvw.net>

Hi,

On Fri, 17 Jan 2003 16:55:31 +0200, Isofarro wrote:
> I think the key question is: How important is it for the users to see the
> whole tree on every page?

That is a tricky one because there are a number of related subjects.  I keep 
the menu in a separate frame because for IE5.5 users or above it only loads a 
handful of nodes initially and then grabs more when they are requested - it's 
really a case of efficiency.

> If its not important at all, then changing the navigation to a breadcrumbs
> trail approach ala Yahoo will be very feasible, small and thus efficient on
> page size.
> 
> If its important to have somewhere you can see all the nodes to a tree, but
> not compulsory to see it on every page, then a site-map type approach will
> suffice - a page of pure navigation.

We have a site map on the public site - see..

http://www.charityskills.org/sitemap.aspx

It's pretty big already and will be getting a lot bigger.

> There are variants of this, and one in particular involves having only a
> relevant part of the tree in view. So on page x, reduce the view of the tree
> from x's parent and all descendant nodes.

This is what we do for downlevel browsers and what I am thinking of doing for 
a 'text only/non framed' version of the pages - similar to MS' MSDN library.

Cheers,

Julian Voelcker
>
Received on Friday, 17 January 2003 12:33:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:08 GMT