W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 1999

Re: Visible, simple, accessible sites

From: Chuck Baslock <cbaslock@kansas.net>
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 10:56:57 -0500
Message-ID: <009d01bf02b7$d172dde0$0845abcd@chuck>
To: <jn@tommy.demon.co.uk>, <mitake@alum.dartmouth.org>, <wai@tommy.demon.co.uk>
Cc: <jn@tommy.demon.co.uk>
Please keep in mind what and whom you are dealing with.
There are several million "home pages" currently available while there are
only several browsers available.
Wouldn't it make more sense to have the browser change the wording?

----- Original Message -----
From: John Nissen <jn@tommy.demon.co.uk>
To: <mitake@alum.dartmouth.org>; <wai@tommy.demon.co.uk>
Cc: <jn@tommy.demon.co.uk>
Sent: Sunday, September 19, 1999 5:51
Subject: Re: Visible, simple, accessible sites

> Hello Mitake,
> You make a good point about entering a page other than the main page
> (or front page as I prefer to call it).
> What is definitely confusing is if the buttons on the page have
> the same names as buttons on the browser.  So no button on the page
> should labelled "home", but rather "main page" or "front page".
> Likewise no button on the page should be labelled "back", but rather
> "parent page", "next outer page", or perhaps simply "out".
> However there are two solutions for getting to the parent:
> a) have a button on each page (except the front page) to its parent;
> b) work out the parent's URL from the current URL, and use this.
> The latter assumes that the URL naming adds a slash-something for each
> level in the hierarchy, so to go to a parent you simply strip the
> last slash-something off the current URL.  This could be done by the
> browser, with a Parent button.
> I assert that the more you can leave to the browser the better,
> so the browser keeps track of where you are in the structures,
> and builds up a model which you then navigate with its buttons.
> The danger of having buttons on the page is that this subverts the
> model being built by the browser, so the browser cannot in turn
> present the simplest possible model to the user.  OK, the buttons
> can be there, but allow the user to simply ignore them.  Of course
> at the same time we need more intelligent browsers and a strict
> URL naming convention corresponding to the site hierarchical
> structure as formed by internal links.
> The way forward towards more intelligent browsers is a matter for
> W3C and the WAI user agent group.
> Cheers from Chiswick,
> John
> --
> In message <1287516182.937590386@[]>
> Mitake Holloman Burts writes:
> >I find site specific  back and home links to be extremely useful and
> >important when my initial introduction to a website is a page other than
> >the main page of the hierarchy, i.e. when I am using a search engine or a
> >reference page. It often gives me an easy way to understand the larger
> >context of a given page. I am generally frustrated by pages which don't
> >give me a way to get up to their parents.
> >> At 05:04 PM 9/17/99 GMT, John Nissen wrote:
> >>>
> >>> 2.2  Don't have back and home buttons on the page
> >>> Again these are confusing, as the behaviour conflicts with that
> >>> of Back and Home buttons on the browser.
> >>>
> >>> 2.3  Have a hierarchy, navigated top-down
> >>> Keep the site hierarchical, and encourage people to enter at top level
> >>> (by premoting the URL for the top level page, by always refering to
> >>> site by this URL, by using it as link from other sites, etc.).
> >>> Have links only down the hierarchy, except for cross-links where
> >>> they are natural (e.g. in an index, see 2.4).
> --
> Access the word, access the world       Tel/fax +44 181 742 3170/8715
> John Nissen                             Email to jn@tommy.demon.co.uk
> Cloudworld Ltd., Chiswick, London, UK   http://www.tommy.demon.co.uk
Received on Sunday, 19 September 1999 12:25:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:05 UTC