- From: <accessys@smart.net>
- Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 09:45:54 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Jamal Mazrui <empower@smart.net>
- cc: Vivienne CONWAY <v.conway@ecu.edu.au>, "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.60.1306210943410.22062@cygnus.smart.net>
I kinda prefer a one paragraph summary and as many different like "things" on one page with a "read more" type of link, but I want that link to be one page, whole thing, unless it is a book in which case chapters is ok. Bob On Fri, 21 Jun 2013, Jamal Mazrui wrote: > Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 09:38:39 -0400 > From: Jamal Mazrui <empower@smart.net> > To: Vivienne CONWAY <v.conway@ecu.edu.au> > Cc: "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org> > Subject: Re: Page length and number of links > Resent-Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 13:39:24 +0000 > Resent-From: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > > Actually, As a screen reader user, I usually prefer a long page with a > complete document rather than multiple pages. This allows me to invoke a > screen reader feature that reads continuously without interruption. It also > allows me to do global searches on the whole document. > > For example, when reading a newspaper or magazine article, I always search > initially for a "print" or "single page" view. Otherwise, it can be quite > tedious to navigate to the next page and isolate the main content again. I > think a lot of blind people share this perspective. > > I do understand that sighted people or people with other disabilities have > different usability considerations. > > Jamal > > On 6/21/2013 6:26 AM, Vivienne CONWAY wrote: >> Thanks for that Morten. >> >> I agree, in that less is usually better. For some reason people seem to >> think they have to put everything on 1 page - often on the home page. >> They don't think about how tedious and often difficult it is for the user >> to find 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: Morten Tollefsen [morten@medialt.no] >> Sent: Friday, 21 June 2013 6:17 PM >> To: Patrick H. Lauke; w3c-wai-ig@w3.org >> Subject: SV: Page length and number of links >> >> Hi! >> >> I agree with Patrick, and this is a classic usability topic. General >> answers do not excist, at least the target group and type of content is >> important. Steve Krug has some quite good usability statements (in the >> book Don't make me think): >> >> 1. Don't make me think >> 2. It doesn't matter how many times I have to click, as long as each click >> is a mindless unambiguous choice. >> 3. Get rid of half the words on each page. Then get rid of half of whats >> left. >> >> As Patrick write: "... though it may make their experience far more >> tedious" is of course correct (and this is probably the reason why you >> asked this question). An example is a page with hundreds of links without >> any local page jumps: possible to use with a keyboard, but not efficient >> for the keyboard youser. >> >> Morten Tollefsen >> www.medialt.no, +47 908 99 305 >> >> -----Opprinnelig melding----- >> Fra: Patrick H. Lauke [mailto:redux@splintered.co.uk] >> Sendt: 21. juni 2013 11:31 >> Til: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org >> Emne: 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 13:46:26 UTC