Re: [breadcrumbs] best practice

some of us are not questioning the creation of the aria-current attribute, 
as specified at https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.1/#aria-current
but I believe the question is if there is enough data (current) that 
refutes or confirms earlier studies that showed confusion when making the 
"current page" an active link in a "bread-crumb" trail.
I believe there are clearly other use cases that justify the need and 
utility of the aria-current attribute, but I'm questioning the use with 
bread-crumb specifically. 

. . .  The aria-current attribute is used when an element within a set of 
related elements is visually styled to indicate it is the current item in 
the set. For example:
A page token used to indicate a link within a set of pagination links, 
where the link is visually styled to represent the currently-displayed 
page.
A step token used to indicate a link within a step indicator for a 
step-based process, where the link is visually styled to represent the 
current step.
A location token used to indicate the image that is visually highlighted 
as the current component of a flow chart.
A date token used to indicate the current date within a calendar.
A time token used to indicate the current time within a timetable.
Authors SHOULD only mark one element in a set of elements as current with 
aria-current.
Authors SHOULD NOT use . . . 

There isn't a "bread-crumb" attribute or widget, correct? Other than using 
a nav-element with an aria-label of ?breadcrumb?.
So the author would have to give a clue that the set of link elements are 
quote bread-crumbs unquote via the aria-label or title attribute, 
otherwise the burden of learning the pattern will rely on the user to be 
able to recognize that it is in fact a "bread-crumb" navigation set of 
hierarchal links.  I believe there is also a "burden" or "responsibility" 
on the user agent / assistive technology (if any).  So, even if this all 
"works" and is "specified", I would recommend some "end-user 
testing/studies" to develop and document the best practice.  We need 
something that refutes or confirms earlier studies 
__________
Regards,
Phill Jenkins
pjenkins@us.ibm.com
Senior Engineer & Accessibility Executive
IBM Research Accessibility
linkedin.com/in/philljenkins/
ibm.com/able
facebook.com/IBMAccessibility
twitter.com/IBMAccess
ageandability.com



From:   Michiel Bijl <michiel.list@moiety.me>
To:     Harry Loots <harry.loots@ieee.org>
Cc:     "Fathauer, Laura" <fathauer@ohio.edu>, Phill Jenkins 
<pjenkins@us.ibm.com>, Matt King <a11ythinker@gmail.com>, W3C WAI ig 
<w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>, "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>
Date:   11/20/2017 10:34 AM
Subject:        Re: [breadcrumbs] best practice



ARIA 1.1 introduced aria-current: https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.1/

Its use is demonstrated in the APG pattern Matt linked to.

? Michiel

On 20 Nov 2017, at 17:08, Harry Loots <harry.loots@ieee.org> wrote:

The issue is not about whether users have gained the ability to recognise 
breadcrumb navigation, but about providing a link that does nothing (i.e., 
creating a redundancy). 

And, what's more important is whether this causes a nuisance to AT users? 
Will it mean they have to listen to the name of the page twice - once from 
the breadcrumb, and another time from the heading? 

How will users tabbing through the page hear "current page"? 

Many thanks
Harry



On 20 November 2017 at 15:45, Fathauer, Laura <fathauer@ohio.edu> wrote:
My rationale is that users tabbing through the page will be able to land 
on that link and hear ?current page? and therefore be able to know that 
the breadcrumb hierarchy of links ends with that link and where that page 
sits.
 
If your usability tests were around 15  years ago, I would posit that in 
general people may have advanced in with their ability to recognize 
breadcrumb navigation. 
 
Laura
 
 
From: harry.loots@googlemail.com [mailto:harry.loots@googlemail.com] On 
Behalf Of Harry Loots
Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 2:36 AM
To: Phill Jenkins <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Matt King <a11ythinker@gmail.com>; W3C WAI ig <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>; 
Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>

Subject: Re: [breadcrumbs] best practice
 
In my experience making the current active page a linked item in the 
breadcrumbs lead to potential confusion for all users. I observed users 
(in usability tests), clicking on this link - expecting to go to a 
previous page - and then ending on the same page (probably around early 
2000s), and have ever since avoided 1) placing the current page name as a 
member of the breadcrumb, and 2) would most definitely not make it an 
active link. 
 
Thanks all for the comments - it appears as if we could do with some 
research in this area... 
 
Kindest regards
Harry
 
 
 
 
On 18 November 2017 at 01:36, Phill Jenkins <pjenkins@us.ibm.com> wrote:
Why is it a best practice to make the current page an active link to the 
same page - isn't an active visible link distracting or at least confusing 
to users with cognitive disabilities? 
        snip of code from pattern:
        . . . 
        <li>
        <a href="./index.html" aria-current="page">
          Breadcrumb Example
        </a>
___________
Regards,
Phill Jenkins




From:        Matt King <a11ythinker@gmail.com>
To:        "'Patrick H. Lauke'" <redux@splintered.co.uk>, <
w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Date:        11/17/2017 03:38 PM
Subject:        RE: [breadcrumbs] best practice




BTW, we have a breadcrumb pattern in the ARIA Authoring Practicess:
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__w3c.github.io_aria-2Dpractices_-23breadcrumb&d=DwIFaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=aWgRqmoh0Xuzjf7UaXq44Tf6K41u809DPE44ioVTOvk&m=EaHSkTPXnr7dz7IhuHLdmQGRwCs_U25W6xuCtcpx4xw&s=e5C8yTeHLQIvfyj7gYB1HCJtEUe9xxudgWp1JsAYXeo&e=


Matt King

-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick H. Lauke [mailto:redux@splintered.co.uk] 
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2017 2:09 AM
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Subject: Re: [breadcrumbs] best practice

On 17/11/2017 09:43, Harry Loots wrote:
> Hi all
> what is the current thinking on breadcrumbs.
> 
> I have a situation where a client want to display the page name in the 
> breadcrumb, then repeat the page name immediately afterwards as a 
> heading, which I know can be a nuisance for text-to-speech users.

I'd say across all the things that can be problematic/nuisance on web 
pages, that's a pretty minor thing. I'd further argue that even if the 
text is repeated, it does serve two separate purposes: in the breadcrumb 
navigation, to indicate this is the current page; as a heading, to, well, 
act as heading for the actual page's content.

In short, don't think it's an actual problem.

> Are their any firm rules on breadcrumbs, or strong views for that 
> matter :)

No firm rules, as with most things in accessibility *grin*

And as is often the case, it'll depend on the specific situation (i.e. 
how is the breadcrumb actually marked up? how long are these page titles
- a few words, or as long as a whole sentence - etc).

P
--
Patrick H. Lauke

www.splintered.co.uk| 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_patrickhlauke&d=DwIFaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=aWgRqmoh0Xuzjf7UaXq44Tf6K41u809DPE44ioVTOvk&m=EaHSkTPXnr7dz7IhuHLdmQGRwCs_U25W6xuCtcpx4xw&s=J975Gwb3-Ry2o92iqMAP_PFQbnC6dMa3J0OrDfrDMig&e=
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__flickr.com_photos_redux_&d=DwIFaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=aWgRqmoh0Xuzjf7UaXq44Tf6K41u809DPE44ioVTOvk&m=EaHSkTPXnr7dz7IhuHLdmQGRwCs_U25W6xuCtcpx4xw&s=E-yGcPVgZ3j5HsanJo6IZR8ue5Lp2jALvkQKRFh3s8Q&e=
| 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__redux.deviantart.com&d=DwIFaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=aWgRqmoh0Xuzjf7UaXq44Tf6K41u809DPE44ioVTOvk&m=EaHSkTPXnr7dz7IhuHLdmQGRwCs_U25W6xuCtcpx4xw&s=KGbXWvU6wp3d7m7ac7HfF4DTluIOlvt_KrAKkbX-j3E&e=

twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke