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

When is a keyboard trap a keyboard trap

From: Vivienne CONWAY <v.conway@ecu.edu.au>
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2012 13:59:21 +0800
To: W3C WAI ig <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <8AFA77741B11DB47B24131F1E38227A9CAB0E4CA01@XCHG-MS1.ads.ecu.edu.au>
Hi all

Seeing you're all so good at answering questions, I'm wondering when something is truly a keyboard trap - the definitions seem to vary a lot.

2.1.2. states that if the keyboard focus can be moved to a component of the page, then you need to be able to move that focus away from that component solely by the keyboard as well.  and "If it requires more than unmodified arrow or tab keys or other standard exit methods, the user is advised of the method for moving focus away".

My question involves what "standard exit methods" this assumes.

Pop-up windows open in a variety of ways - new windows, new tabs.  Media players pop up from links and then the user has trouble closing them (if they even know they are in a new window).  Sometimes you can get out by Ctrl+W, or Alt+F4, and sometimes trying one of these causes lots of other problems.  It also depends upon what browser you're using.  For example in IE9, both Ctrl+W and Alt+F4 do the same thing, while in Firefox Alt+F4 displays a warningsaying do you want to close all tabs.  Also, sometimes closing the popup by a keyboard shortcut may close the browser which is a huge problem.

How do you decide what a "standard exit method" is?  There are quite a few lists, but many users aren't even aware of these shortcuts.  I'd personally like to see people provide an annoucement that the new window is opening and telling the user how to get back again, but I can't see that happening across the board.  For example, that's a lot of information to attach to a Twitter widget that's set to open a new window.

I appreciate your thoughts.


Regards

Vivienne L. Conway, B.IT(Hons), MACS CT, AALIA(cs)
PhD Candidate & Sessional Lecturer, Edith Cowan University, Perth, W.A.
Director, Web Key IT Pty Ltd.
v.conway@ecu.edu.au
v.conway@webkeyit.com
Mob: 0415 383 673

This email is confidential and intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify me immediately by return email or telephone and destroy the original message.
________________________________________
From: pigsotwing@gmail.com [pigsotwing@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Andy Mabbett [andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk]
Sent: Friday, 10 August 2012 1:07 AM
To: W3C WAI ig
Subject: Re: Limit on the links in a page

On 9 August 2012 15:06,  <accessys@smart.net> wrote:

> my mind boggles at why so many links.

Tables of data; indices, references/ citations, lists, whole-year
calendars, etc.

For example, there are around 170 in the 'Notes' section of today's
"featured article" on the English-language Wikipedia:

   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Ganga_Dynasty#Notes

 and far more than 200 in the whole article.

--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

This e-mail is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient you must not disclose or use the information contained within. If you have received it in error please return it to the sender via reply e-mail and delete any record of it from your system. The information contained within is not the opinion of Edith Cowan University in general and the University accepts no liability for the accuracy of the information provided.

CRICOS IPC 00279B
Received on Friday, 10 August 2012 05:59:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:13:30 UTC