W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2009

Re: Success Criterion 2.4.7. Focus Order

From: David Poehlman <poehlman1@comcast.net>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 13:01:34 -0400
Cc: WAI Interest Group <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-Id: <7E7C0F10-AE09-4605-8848-2234214A6EA0@comcast.net>
To: Phill Jenkins <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>

Here is what it comes down to.  They don't arm meaning they don't  
cause accessibility problems.  I am not certain that confusion counts.

On Apr 30, 2009, at 12:51 PM, Phill Jenkins wrote:

the clear text to a screen reader user is not clear to a sighted user,  
a magnifier user, and not clear to a user with a reading or learning  
disability,  Explaining that this link will take you somewhere else on  
the page makes little to no sense to a sighted user that just moves  
their eye to get to another place on the page - they have little idea  
about point of regard, focus indicators and all the things that screen  
reader and keyboard users understand.  My point is that there is no  
single piece of "clear text" explaining the "skip to " link.  Using  
"Skip to main content" as the link text and the title attribute="this  
link will move the focus to the beginning of the main content on the  
page following the bread crumb trail" may be clear text to a screen  
reader user, but makes little sense to a sighted user and 80% of the  
time causes confusion.  I'm not saying not to use skip links - I'm all  
for them, but they need to be "hide-able" for users who don't need  
them or get confused by them.

Do you agree there is no universal link and title text that all users  
will understand?  If you do, again, I would love to see some study data.

Phill Jenkins,

Jonnie Appleseed
with his
Hands-On Technolog(eye)s
reducing technology's disabilities
one byte at a time
Received on Thursday, 30 April 2009 17:02:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:39 UTC