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 08:20:03 -0500
Message-ID: <003201c51361$1676d850$6401a8c0@DAVIDPC>
To: "Tina Holmboe" <tina@greytower.net>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>

Ok,  I'll put it succinctly.  If site navigation is so bad that it needs to 
be skipped, how can it be improved so that it does not need to be skipped. 
It seems that we've been reduced to one nav aide and that is to skip from or 
to someting.  Gone are the days it seems when a well structured site was 
envited.  It seems we've religated it to being te step child to serve the 
needs of marketing types as a compromise to building truly navigable sites. 
If we need to skip it, te question becomes, what is rong with it that it 
needs to be skipped?  The answer lies somewhere in te reasoning beind its 
invention in the first place and that is to allow for the skipping of 
"repetative" links.  In stead of this, why not have sites ave a link on 
every page to go to te site navigation page if it is so important?

Johnnie Apple Seed
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tina Holmboe" <tina@greytower.net>
To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 7:53 AM
Subject: Re: Copywriting for Screenreaders (was Alt text for URL's)



On 15 Feb, Kurt_Mattes@bankone.com wrote:

> main 'topic' we may only need one hidden link to allow users an

  Visible. Hidden links are Not A Good Idea(tm) - even people WITH CSS
  might want or need that link.



> efficient way to bypass a global section residing at the top of every
> page.  Either way, both seem to provide the same efficiency - quickly
> getting to content the user is interested in.  I sense there is some
> point I am not getting.

  You and me both, Kurt. You and me both.

-- 
 -    Tina Holmboe                    Greytower Technologies
   tina@greytower.net                http://www.greytower.net/
   [+46] 0708 557 905
Received on Tuesday, 15 February 2005 13:20:46 GMT

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