W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2013

RE: Page length and number of links

From: Vivienne CONWAY <v.conway@ecu.edu.au>
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 17:57:48 +0800
To: "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>, "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <8AFA77741B11DB47B24131F1E38227A901286664AFB1@XCHG-MS1.ads.ecu.edu.au>
Hi Patrick
Thank you for that, it's what I thought.  It does seem odd that a page can be miles long and the only thing you can say is that this is not 'best practice' and point out the lack of adequate headings.  However I think you're right and it is more of a usability issue.  I pity anyone using a screen reader or keyboard navigation having to wade through miles of links or text to get to the information they need.


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: Patrick H. Lauke [redux@splintered.co.uk]
Sent: Friday, 21 June 2013 5:22 PM
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Subject: Re: Page length and number of links

On 21/06/2013 09:55, Vivienne CONWAY wrote:
> I'm looking for a bit of advice about the appropriate maximum length of
> a page and number of links on pages.  We recently came across a page
> that seems to go on forever and can't see any of the guidelines that
> actually deals with this issue.  The page is poorly divided up and that
> obviously comes under headings etc.
> Also, wondering if anyone has any 'best practice' links on both this and
> the number of links that a page should limit itself to.  If you think
> either of these violates WCAG 2, I'd really like to hear how and why.

This sounds to me like more of a general usability issue rather than a
specific accessibility one (as overly long pages will likely affect all
users, not just specifically users with disabilities, though it may make
their experience far more tedious). And no, there doesn't seem to be
anything specific in WCAG 2.0 on this matter.

It's difficult to say what length a page should be..."as long as it
needs to be" is possibly the only advice I could give.

If this was part of an audit, I'd add it as a general remark about
usability.

Sorry, not very helpful I guess...

P
--
Patrick H. Lauke
______________________________________________________________
re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively
[latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]

www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk
http://redux.deviantart.com | http://flickr.com/photos/redux/
______________________________________________________________
twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
______________________________________________________________

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
Received on Friday, 21 June 2013 10:00:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:49 UTC