RE: Copywriting for Screenreaders (was Alt text for URL's)

Dave Pullman wrote:

<blockquote>
> Andy asks for examples and John provides tem indirectly as what not to

> do.
</blockquote>

Actually I wasn't providing ane xample of "what not to do." I was trying
to describe a problematic pattern I've been noticing lately-- a problem
that may well be a byproduct of advice I and others have provided about
how to make content more readily accessible. I was hoping that there'd
be some good discussion about whether this really *is* a problem (or is
it just that I'm not using my tools as well as I could be?), and, if it
is a real problem, that we could figure out together some good ways to
solve it.

This goes back to previous threads about questions like how many <h1>
elements there may be on a given page, and in general to the issue of
how to map out an information structure at page level that allows all
users  (not just blind ones) to tell the difference between navigation
and content *and* quickly and easily get to the area they need.


John



"Good design is accessible design." 
John Slatin, Ph.D.
Director, Accessibility Institute
University of Texas at Austin
FAC 248C
1 University Station G9600
Austin, TX 78712
ph 512-495-4288, f 512-495-4524
email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu
web http://www.utexas.edu/research/accessibility/


 



-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of David Dorward
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2005 9:24 am
To: wai-ig list
Subject: Re: Copywriting for Screenreaders (was Alt text for URL's)



On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 10:03:38AM -0500, david poehlman wrote:

> Andy asks for examples and John provides tem indirectly as what not to

> do.

Examples of "what not to do" are generally only useful when "not doing
that" will remove the problem - removing a link to the content won't
solve the problem of making it easy for the user to get to the content.
How about you provide, as requested previously, an example of "the right
way to do it"?

> This is all about authoring and design.  Our goal is accessible 
> content.
> We've been engaged in an ever more slippery sloap for several years
now and 
> we need to level the field and we will.  Jaws won't need all that
special 
> stuff nor will window eyes and we won't have "skip..." because we
won't have 
> to.  The reason you have to have a "skip..." is because there are
hubes 
> numbers of links that need to beskipped through in order to reach
where you 
> want to go but tat need not be the case and andy, you know it. 

OK then - how do you present the user (whatever user agent they choose
to use) with convenient navigation and content on one page without
(depending on the relative positions of the content and navigation in
the document) having a link to the content before the navigation or a
link to the navigation before the content?

-- 
David Dorward                                      http://dorward.me.uk

Received on Thursday, 17 February 2005 15:36:32 UTC