- From: <danield@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 06:47:31 +0200
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
------- Forwarded Message Return-Path: danield@tux.w3.org Delivery-Date: Thu Apr 26 15:43:34 2001 Return-Path: <danield@tux.w3.org> Received: from sophia.inria.fr by zidane.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f3QDhXx22640 for <danield@zidane.inria.fr>; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 15:43:33 +0200 Received: from tux.w3.org by sophia.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f3QDhTD00016 for <danield@sophia.inria.fr>; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 15:43:29 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from danield@localhost) by tux.w3.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA15088 for danield@sophia.inria.fr; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 09:43:33 -0400 Received: from www19.w3.org (www19.w3.org [18.29.0.19]) by tux.w3.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA15085 for <danield@w3.org>; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 09:43:32 -0400 Received: by www19.w3.org (8.9.0/8.9.0) id JAA17878 for danield@w3.org; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 09:43:31 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 09:43:31 -0400 (EDT) X-Envelope-From: w3c-wai-ig-request@tux.w3.org Thu Apr 26 09:43:26 2001 Received: from tux.w3.org (tux.w3.org [18.29.0.27]) by www19.w3.org (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id JAA17858 for <w3c-wai-ig@www19.w3.org>; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 09:43:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mercury.Sun.COM (mercury.Sun.COM [192.9.25.1]) by tux.w3.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA15079 for <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 09:43:26 -0400 Received: from ireserver.Ireland.Sun.COM ([129.156.220.7]) by mercury.Sun.COM (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id GAA14366; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 06:43:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ireland.sun.com (dbl-isdn-104 [129.156.227.104]) by ireserver.Ireland.Sun.COM (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8/ENSMAIL,v2.1p1) with ESMTP id OAA08876; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 14:43:13 +0100 (BST) Sender: Bill.Haneman@Sun.COM Message-ID: <3AE82698.51AB64D7@ireland.sun.com> Old-Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 14:46:00 +0100 From: Bill Haneman <bill.haneman@ireland.sun.com> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.14 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Scott Luebking <phoenixl@sonic.net> CC: aaronl@chorus.net, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org, joki@netscape.com, mozilla-accessibility@mozilla.org References: <200104252318.f3PNIpR01132@sonic.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Diagnostic: Not on the accept list Subject: [Moderator Action] Re: Should accesskey focus or activate? X-Diagnostic: Mail coming from a daemon, ignored X-Envelope-To: w3c-wai-ig Scott Luebking wrote: > > Hi, Aaron > > One approach would be to have two types of access keys. If a control > is assigned access key 'Z', the something like ctrl-shift-Z focuses > and ctrl-alt-Z activates. Remember that for accessibility it's important to use as few combo-keystrokes as possible. Even with sticky keys, for a user with, say, poor hand control, multi-keystroke sequences make the likelihood of mistyping much higher (error rate multiplies by the number of keystrokes). Example: person with Parkinson's mistypes a key 20% of the time. single key: 80% success double key: 64% success triple key: 51% success... of course hitting backspace to correct is subject to the same error rate. Admittedly the meta keys are sometimes easier to hit than other keys. The point is that if it's feasible to use only one shift/meta key, that's preferable to multiple meta keys. > That way the user can make the determination > at time of use. This actual choice of ctrl, alt, etc should probably > be configurable because of operating system and also access technology > conflicts. Yep, very important! Regards, Bill > Scott > > > Hello all, a Netscape developer wanted to know whether accesskey should > > focus or activate controls, or whether it depends on the type of control. > > Here's his question in detail: - -- - -------------- Bill Haneman Gnome Accessibility / Batik SVG Toolkit Sun Microsystems Ireland ------- End of Forwarded Message
Received on Saturday, 28 April 2001 00:47:43 UTC