- From: David Poehlman <poehlman1@comcast.net>
- Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 13:01:34 -0400
- To: Phill Jenkins <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: WAI Interest Group <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
ok, Here is what it comes down to. They don't arm meaning they don't cause accessibility problems. I am not certain that confusion counts. On Apr 30, 2009, at 12:51 PM, Phill Jenkins wrote: David, the clear text to a screen reader user is not clear to a sighted user, a magnifier user, and not clear to a user with a reading or learning disability, Explaining that this link will take you somewhere else on the page makes little to no sense to a sighted user that just moves their eye to get to another place on the page - they have little idea about point of regard, focus indicators and all the things that screen reader and keyboard users understand. My point is that there is no single piece of "clear text" explaining the "skip to " link. Using "Skip to main content" as the link text and the title attribute="this link will move the focus to the beginning of the main content on the page following the bread crumb trail" may be clear text to a screen reader user, but makes little sense to a sighted user and 80% of the time causes confusion. I'm not saying not to use skip links - I'm all for them, but they need to be "hide-able" for users who don't need them or get confused by them. Do you agree there is no universal link and title text that all users will understand? If you do, again, I would love to see some study data. Regards, Phill Jenkins, -- Jonnie Appleseed with his Hands-On Technolog(eye)s reducing technology's disabilities one byte at a time
Received on Thursday, 30 April 2009 17:02:15 UTC