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

Re: Access Keys as a means to passing 2.4.1 Bypass Blocks

From: Devarshi Pant <devarshipant@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 15:29:22 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJGQbjtyOpPf8q50v5ASJxOCYiJ4+t4wCtD6LJTRo4je3cLvVA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Vivienne CONWAY <v.conway@ecu.edu.au>
Cc: David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>, Harry Loots <harry.loots@ieee.org>, Userite <richard@userite.com>, "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
I think help guides to get information on access keys should be
discouraged. There are smarter ways to get this information, for example,
Social Security Administrationís (SSA) best practices library recommends
the use of a control key to reveal hot keys. Go to the page at
http://www.ssa.gov/accessibility/bpl/bps/forms/buttons/default.htm -- Press
the control key to get the information.

On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 2:48 AM, Vivienne CONWAY <v.conway@ecu.edu.au>wrote:

> Hi David
> Thanks for that.
> I find that when access keys are used, they are often very well-hidden and
> only people 'in the know' realize they are even there.  As you said,
> normally they are described in a separate page/link.  Putting the link to
> the description and purpose of the keys is often more cluttered than just
> using well-placed skip links.  At least with skip links most people know
> how to use them and their purpose is clear.  If only we could get people to
> have them always visible - yes, I know it clutters the top.  However I have
> seen it done very successfully so I just think we need to be more open to
> having the accessibility features visible - demonstrates our desire to make
> things easier for people.
> By the way, I'm still not sure why headings satisfy this criterion.  If
> you rely on the heading, it then requires subjective analysis to determine
> if the headings are sufficient to enable people to satisfactorily skip the
> repeated content.The headings only help screen reader users, not people who
> rely on tab control or have low vision.
> Regards
> Vivienne L. Conway, B.IT <http://b.it/>(Hons), MACS CT, AALIA(cs)
> PhD Candidate & Sessional Lecturer, Edith Cowan University, Perth, W.A.
> Director, Web Key IT Pty Ltd.
> v.conway@ecu.edu.au
> v.conway@webkeyit.com
> Mob: 0415 383 673
> This email is confidential and intended only for the use of the individual
> or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are
> notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this email is
> strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please
> notify me immediately by return email or telephone and destroy the original
> message.
> ________________________________________
> From: David Woolley [forums@david-woolley.me.uk]
> Sent: Tuesday, 16 October 2012 2:41 PM
> To: Vivienne CONWAY
> Cc: Harry Loots; Userite; w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Access Keys as a means to passing 2.4.1 Bypass Blocks
>  Vivienne CONWAY wrote:
> >
> > Question - do you believe that the provision of access keys would
> > produce a 'pass' grade for 2.4.1?
> For an inside page of a site which people have to log in to, and
> normally access frequently, maybe.  For a page that could be reached by
> search engines, by unfamiliar users, you would need to explain the
> access key at the top of the page, and that would probably be more
> intrusive to the design than a skip link.
> On an earlier point, if a user has to follow a special link to find
> accessibility features, they are only going to do so if they are
> desperate to access the site, or they are going to be  frequent user.
> Normally these are done as a sop to accessibility with the hope that
> they won't disrupt the design.  Often they just tell you how to use the
> general accessibility features of mainstream browsers.
> --
> David Woolley
> Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want.
> RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam,
> that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work.
>  This e-mail is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient you
> must not disclose or use the information contained within. If you have
> received it in error please return it to the sender via reply e-mail and
> delete any record of it from your system. The information contained within
> is not the opinion of Edith Cowan University in general and the University
> accepts no liability for the accuracy of the information provided.
Received on Tuesday, 16 October 2012 19:29:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:36:42 UTC