W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > wai-xtech@w3.org > October 2004

Re: request for sample page structure analyses

From: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 10:07:05 -0400
To: wai-xtech@w3.org
Message-ID: <20041026140705.GO16575@rednote.net>
My second, and by far most important nomination, is Bugzilla. I cannot
say whether all Bugzilla implementations are as burdensome as the one I
know best at redhat.com, but I believe there's an issue almost

Please note, you'll need to create an account and login to really see
the issue. Go to:


For anyone who can't create such an account, I'm attaching (if the
server will let me), the page I get after logging in.

The number one, over-riding problem? 2700 active link elements (as
counted by lynx' "links and form fields are numbered" feature. That's 45
screenfulls at my 160 X 64 chars resolution!

The sad thing is that there seem to be many good accessibility features
to Bugzilla. The navbar seems terse and appropriate, for example. One
can choose to use javascript, or not. One can choose to do tabular
format (which yields 2791 links for me), or not. The footer also seems
blessedly terse and appropriate.

The overwhelming weight is in the substantive body and requires a better
organizational option, imho. It's difficult to imagine how one would
appropriately deal with 2700 active link elements. And, one must get
them appropriately handled for a bug report to be taken seriously.
Perhaps there is an appropriate path here, but I've been unable to find

On the good news side, an appropriate approach is eminently worth
pursuing. I obtained a commitment from the Bugzilla maintainer to fix
whatever we might specify as an appropriate fix in order to support
accessibility. So, this is no longer an just a standards setting
exercise, I think.

Received on Tuesday, 26 October 2004 14:28:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:51:30 UTC