W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2012

Re: any suggested alternatives to accessible version

From: Cindy-Sue Causey <butterflybytes@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 10:25:25 +0000
Message-ID: <CAO1P-kAR4WjU0PFL7dw41AaVCRUdZPW_80=eZsP3Sp9_Kbiujg@mail.gmail.com>
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
On 2/16/12, David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk> wrote:
> Marc Haunschild wrote:
>>
>> link the word "accessible" to wikipedia:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accessible
>>
>
> If you do that you will have to resort to something like Click here for
> the actual link to the accessible site.  "accessible" needs to be part
> of the link name to that site.



+1 to what David says here about the word "accessible" (or its
alternative) more needing to be part of the ultimate link and not a
secondary redirect most likely coming before the actual accessible
link..

Speaking as a "sighted" user with notably degenerating cognition, I've
encountered this exact type of situation and have in fact ended up
totally confused.. My brain locked in on that first link that was
*well-intended* but instead was so distracting, the author's "real"
message lost significant footage/merit in the brain fog that
incidentally occurred.. Kind of the Internet's version of the
distractible "something shiny".. :))

Cindy-Sue :)

- :: -
http://www.welovebirds.org/profile/BackyardPishing
Talking Rock, Pickens County, Georgia, USA
~
Received on Thursday, 16 February 2012 10:25:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 16 February 2012 10:25:58 GMT