W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 2012

FW: Recursive Links in menu bars - continued

From: Jan Eric Hellbusch <hellbusch@2bweb.de>
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 11:20:34 +0200
To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <003401cd957e$dbf13b50$93d3b1f0$@2bweb.de>
Hi all, admins,

at least two mails on this matter didn't go through the list (Kerstin's and
Olaf's mails), although they should have. Olaf and Kerstin both contacted me
because of that. Kerstin's mail was at the bottom of my reply. Olaf's mail
is included in this mail.


-----Original Message-----
From: Olaf Drümmer [mailto:olaf@druemmer.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 10:13 AM
To: W3C WAI ig
Cc: Olaf Drümmer; Jan Eric Hellbusch
Subject: Re: Recursive Links in menu bars - continued

The main problem i see is that UI design in general requires that repeat UI
elements remain constant - i.e. at the same location, with the same
appearance/label, with the same behavior,  etc. So while a link to the
current page does not offer that much functional value it still might be a
good idea to keep it as an active link at least from this point of view, and
as long as no other more important aspect makes it desirable to make it
inactive. The best would probably be to indicate that a given link is the
link to the current page, e.g. by highlighting it visually, adjusting its
label so it contains "current page", etc.

In addition we should take into account that users as a community learn over
time. Ten years ago it was very uncommon to have a link on the current page
that essentially points to the current page. Now, in the world of blogs and
Web 2.0 etc. it has become more common than not. As far as I can tell,
people get used to it, or even expect it.

In summary I would say I don't care, but also believe we should not make a
fuss around it if somebody does it the other way. 


On 18 Sep 2012, at 09:57, Jan Eric Hellbusch wrote:

> Hi all,
> thanks for the input.
> After reading the replies I think I should put my question differently:
> When a link in a menu bar is deactivated, because the link would 
> otherwise point to the current page, do any users feel the page is 
> broken or semantically defect?
> Considerations:
> * the menu is on a static page
> * See also Example #3 on http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/G128.html
> * text (i.e. "current page") is additionally being added to the menu 
> item
> * the menu items are designed to highlight current items (also in 
> contrast
> mode)
> The point is, that
> * some people (as Andrew) ask, why should somebody want to reload the
> (static) page and start from the top, and
> * other people say, it is a question of usability/expectations to be 
> able to reload the page from a menu item pointing to the current page.
> Somehow the answer to the above question seems vague. I personally 
> would deactivate links, but at the same time I have no 
> straight-forward arguments other than what Andrew has already written. 
> And, if screenreader usage and highlighting have been optimized, is it 
> still a question of accessibility, or of usability, of both or none?
> Any more thoughts on the matter?
> Regards,
> Jan
Received on Tuesday, 18 September 2012 09:21:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:36:41 UTC