- From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com>
- Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 19:25:54 -0700
- To: sec508@trace.wisc.edu
- Cc: sec508@trace.wisc.edu, Katie Haritos-Shea <kshea@apollo.fedworld.gov>, michael_cortese@ita.doc.gov, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org, wai-xtech@w3.org, w3c-wai-eo@w3.org
At 05:27 PM 6/4/2001 , Jim Thatcher wrote: >I find the objections by Kynn and others to the use of a Skip Navigation >Link as alt text on an image unconvincing. I believe the skip navigation >idea is second to alt text on images in importance in making a site >accessible. Oh, I'm not saying it's a show-stopper, but it's important to realize that what we are dealing with here is a problem -with HTML- in that it doesn't have the mechanism to allow for navigation skipping in an elegant manner (and thus it's not supported by the browsers). HTML doesn't even really allow you to identify the navigation or the primary content, either. Which are big detriments to increasing accessibility. Thus, to get around this, it's necessary to abuse HTML in order to get around its limitations -- the primary limitation being "HTML is a terrible language for doing web development" :) -- and to do that, we have to come up with a somewhat messy hack. Messy hacks are -bad-, and always have been, because once they are entrenched they become an obstacle to doing things the right way, or even a crutch that prevents the development of "the right way." "Why add explicit identification of navigation groups and primary content to XHTML 2, if you can just include 'skip links?'" It's very important to remember that a "skip links" mechanism is a technique -- it's not the means to the end, it's a way of accomplishing something. The general principle is "allow for easy intra-page identification and navigation, between primary (and other) content and navigation elements." One way to do that is to include skippable links. But it may not be necessary in all cases -- for example, with a right hand navbar, the need to 'skip links' may be eliminated, since the content will typically read first, and the navigation links after that. Jim's site itself is an excellent example of this; while he does have a "skip to main content" link, it doesn't actually skip over any navigation links, just a few headers that define what the site is about. (In actuality, I don't think he even needs that link, which only skips two lines content.) Note, however, that a strict reading of 508 regulations could lead you to assume that Jim's site is deficient (or would be, if it were a government site); the 508 rule on "skip links" is: (o) A method shall be provided that permits users to skip repetitive navigation links. ...and since he doesn't allow for skipping of navigation links (just of two headings) maybe he's in violation? I think not, though, since it says "a method shall be provided" and I feel that the layout of his page _is_ that method. What's my point here? I think messy hacks and kludges are okay, as long as we don't end up fooling ourselves into thinking it's the "right way" to do things. As long as we keep in mind that ultimately we are breaking the technical rules of HTML for a greater purpose, and as long as we are not convinced there is only -one- method for allowing links to be skipped! --Kynn -- Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com> http://kynn.com/ Technical Developer Liaison, Reef http://www.reef.com/ Chief Technologist, Idyll Mountain Internet http://idyllmtn.com/ Online Instructor, Accessible Web Design http://kynn.com/+d201
Received on Monday, 4 June 2001 22:26:19 UTC