- From: david poehlman <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 10:53:01 -0500
- To: "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Indeed they do not but they also cannot use skip nav or do not need to. One part of good page structure is that if you have good methods to get to each section of the page. Tis is were internal anchors come in but calling them something and using skip nav as a hack for bad structure is not good structure. Johnnie Apple Seed ----- Original Message ----- From: "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk> To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org> Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 10:26 AM Subject: Re: Copywriting for Screenreaders (was Alt text for URL's) david poehlman wrote: > If I have lynx set up to have links and formfields numbered, every link is > easily accessible by typing its number and pressing enter. Skip to is > useless to lynx. not to sound flippant, but: just because *you* use the numbered links and formfields, it doesn't mean that it's useless for *all* lynx users. > Skip to begs the question over all because it sets asside > good page structure. ok, so...good page structure: main navigation / page-specific sub navigation (e.g. related pages) / main content / footer imagine now that the main navigation has, say, 10 links, and the sub navigation another 5 or so. to get to the content, users have to tab through the 15 links first. or are we talking about keeping the navigation in a discrete element (e.g. an unordered list) that the user can skip using the browser's / AT's functions? -- Patrick H. Lauke _____________________________________________________ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com
Received on Monday, 14 February 2005 15:53:38 UTC