- From: Devarshi Pant <devarshipant@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 23:46:29 -0400
- To: David Hilbert Poehlman <poehlman1@comcast.net>
- Cc: "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Hold down the control key and the caret symbol (hat) to reveal the hot keys. This symbol can be found above number 6. On 10/16/12, David Hilbert Poehlman <poehlman1@comcast.net> wrote: > This is a nice example and you are correct that help pages are not good but > the example does not work on my mac, unless I'm doing something rong, when I > press control, nothing happens. On the other hand, it should be noted that > the help tip can be gotten but I don't have an alt key to fire the access > keys. > > On Oct 16, 2012, at 3:29 PM, Devarshi Pant <devarshipant@gmail.com> wrote: > > 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 > Administration’s (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. > -Devarshi > > 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(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. > > CRICOS IPC 00279B > > > > > -- > Jonnie Appleseed > With His > Hands-On Technolog(eye)s > touching the internet > Reducing Technology's disabilities > One Byte At a time > > > > > -- Thanks, Devarshi Pant
Received on Wednesday, 17 October 2012 03:46:56 UTC