W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > October to December 2012

FW: Access Keys as a means to passing 2.4.1 Bypass Blocks

From: Richards, Jan <jrichards@ocadu.ca>
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 15:42:45 +0000
To: "w3c-wai-ua@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
Message-ID: <0B1EB1C972BCB740B522ACBCD5F48DEB03AFAE4B@ocadmail-maildb.ocad.ca>
Interesting debate going on about access keys on IG.



T 416 977 6000 x3957
F 416 977 9844
E jrichards@ocadu.ca

-----Original Message-----
From: deborah.kaplan@suberic.net [mailto:deborah.kaplan@suberic.net] 
Sent: October-15-12 11:31 AM
To: Harry Loots
Cc: Vivienne CONWAY; Userite; w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Subject: Re: Access Keys as a means to passing 2.4.1 Bypass Blocks

On Mon, 15 Oct 2012, Harry Loots wrote:
> Alt+ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 0, S and a few others are not bound to 
> Alt+ any
> browser as far as I am aware?

You will want to do your testing beyond just what is bound  to the browser, however. Many people have other adaptive technologies in place and the default settings of other adaptive tech may use those key bindings -- I'm not sure of those in particular. I know, for example, that people frequently put into place keystroke bindings on websites (Ajax, not access key) which don't interfere with anything built-in to the browser but DO interfere with the mouseless browsing extension used by many keyboard users.

(Another thing to take into account with access keys is how you expose them to non-screen reader users. Frequently lists of access keys are published via text hidden from visual display but not from screen reader via CSS, and neither zoom nor keyboard-only users ever know the list exists.)

Received on Monday, 15 October 2012 15:43:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:49:42 UTC