W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2005

Re: Copywriting for Screenreaders (was Alt text for URL's)

From: david poehlman <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 07:12:13 -0500
Message-ID: <000901c51357$96fd91d0$6401a8c0@DAVIDPC>
To: "Patrick Lauke" <P.H.Lauke@salford.ac.uk>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>

David is right.  The intent of this link is specifically targeted and need 
not be if the sites are marked up with structure in mind.  Navigation is 
important and part of navigation is to be able to move through a site 
efficiently.  As I see it, a table of contents is just about the only way to 
allow for moving through a page efficiently with a little added help from 
other internal sources such as the ability to go back to the top of a page, 
to go to the navigation aides for the site if need be to go to the various 
parts of the page if there are sections of interest.  "Skip..." was provided 
as a hack because there was a lot of resistance to providing good page 
structure and authoring tools don't necessarily fascilitate it and there 
are/were so many badly structured sites out there that it was felt 
unreasonable to create other than a hack to get around the problem.  People 
it seems go to great length to keep bad structure  with all kinds of excuses 
to do it.

Johnnie Apple Seed
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Patrick Lauke" <P.H.Lauke@salford.ac.uk>
To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 4:11 AM
Subject: RE: Copywriting for Screenreaders (was Alt text for URL's)

> Behalf Of Pawson, David

> dp. How might it be described if I write
> <a href="#content">Go turn yourself into a toad and you'll
> get to the target of this lnk</a>
> Is that a skip? Surely the content of element is for local
> use? It can be
> very helpful, or of little use. Specifying that it always
> should contain
> a specific word is hardly in the spirit of SGML markup? Table
> of contents? Click here?
> Its author options again.


sorry, but you lost me. What *are* we discussing here? I
thought we were debating the concept of "skip" links (regardless
of the exact wording), and not whether or not we should set a
standard phrase or set of words (and then what, hardcode it into
browsers to look for it?)

Patrick H. Lauke
Webmaster / University of Salford
Received on Tuesday, 15 February 2005 12:12:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:31 UTC