- From: Harry Loots <harry.loots@ieee.org>
- Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 11:32:18 +0100
- To: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Cc: Léonie Watson <tink@tink.co.uk>, W3C WAI ig <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, JF <john@foliot.ca>
- Message-ID: <CA++-QFd0fpiyHLorM=-1QC=id9AM9zU+O5Hcai8pW0LexOCS+A@mail.gmail.com>
Thanks Steve sounds like a way forward. I'd think that this should be an extension to your <main>. So for example, if a jump to <main> is initiated by CTRL+[KEY] then negotiating block to block could be CTRL+SHFT+[KEY], so that it may be both an extension to <main> or a fall-back if <main> is not declared in the code. Take care Harry On 27 March 2013 19:00, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi harry, > > as previously mentioned a way forward is to define how the feature would > work and get interest from implementers. That's what I did with <main> and > anybody can do it with this feature > > > with regards > > -- > SteveF > HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/> > <http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html> > > > On 27 March 2013 17:32, Harry Loots <harry.loots@ieee.org> wrote: > >> I'm not suggesting it should be used instead of <main> / role=main, but >> in addition to. >> The advantage of <main> is you can jump directly to it; the disadvantage >> is that you can only jump to one block of content. >> >> The advantage of the Hickson proposal, is that you can jump from one >> block of (interesting) content to the next (e.g.: there may be several >> articles in the page, and not just one, i.e., blog). By jumping from >> headline to headline you could quickly 'scan' through content in the page. >> <main> will only be able to get you to the first heading. I could even, >> halfway through an article decide I don't want to read further and jump to >> the next one. >> >> I can see strengths in both approaches. And I can see reason for both to >> exit side by side and increase the ability of keyboard users to rapidly >> move through a page. Providing people with multiple means to get to >> content, can only make the web more accessible. >> >> >> Take care >> Harry >> >> >> >> On 27 March 2013 18:01, Léonie Watson <tink@tink.co.uk> wrote: >> >>> Harry Loots wrote:**** >>> >>> “Probably no more so than clicking on multiple skip links, as you >>> traverse header, main navigation, secondary navigation, etc, etc...”**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Sorry, I meant inefficient from a UA implementation point of view. If >>> the objective is to move focus directly to the start of the main content, >>> it seems that hooking into a specific element is a more efficient and >>> reliable way to do it than by using a process of elimination. **** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> “The advantage of having such a technique, would be that a user can jump >>> from one block of (non-interesting) content to a next block of content with >>> a single shortcut key sequence. So that, even where developers have >>> forgotten to mark up blocks of content, and have forgotten to provide skip >>> links, users can still skip reasonably quickly to main content blocks.”* >>> *** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> We already have that ability (in screen readers at least). HTML5 >>> elements and/or the ARIA landmark roles they map to facilitate movement >>> between chunks of content using a single key command.**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> One of the attractions of the main element is that it could facilitate a >>> single command to move focus directly to the main content area of the page. >>> Essentially like a skip link, but one that can be invoked from anywhere on >>> the page not just when focus is on a particular anchor.**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> This is already possible with role=”main” of course. The advantage of >>> mapping the main role to an HTML5 element is that it becomes a native part >>> of HTML, which increases the likelyhood it’ll be used.**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> So whether you move from one chunk of content to another and finally >>> arrive at the main content, or want to move directly to the main content >>> area, hooking that interaction into a specific element would seem to be the >>> most sensible way to approach it.**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Léonie.**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> -- **** >>> >>> Carpe diem.**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> *From:* harry.loots@googlemail.com [mailto:harry.loots@googlemail.com] *On >>> Behalf Of *Harry Loots >>> *Sent:* 27 March 2013 16:30 >>> *To:* tink@tink.co.uk >>> *Cc:* Steve Faulkner; W3C WAI ig; Ian Hickson; JF >>> >>> *Subject:* Re: Rethinking the necessities of ARIA landmark role "main" >>> and HTML5 <main> element**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Hi Léonie**** >>> >>> But isn’t that a very inefficient way to get there?**** >>> >>> Probably no more so than clicking on multiple skip links, as you >>> traverse header, main navigation, secondary navigation, etc, etc...**** >>> >>> The advantage of having such a technique, would be that a user can jump >>> from one block of (non-interesting) content to a next block of content with >>> a single shortcut key sequence. So that, even where developers have >>> forgotten to mark up blocks of content, and have forgotten to provide skip >>> links, users can still skip reasonably quickly to main content blocks. * >>> *** >>> >>> Take care**** >>> >>> Harry**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> On 27 March 2013 17:01, Léonie Watson <tink@tink.co.uk> wrote:**** >>> >>> Harry Loots wrote:**** >>> >>> “Here's how the Hixon proposal may work:**** >>> >>> >>> >>> tab -> (jump to) <header> ignore, skip -> (jump to) <nav> ignore, skip >>> -> (jump to) <aside> ignore, skip -> (jump to) <div id="gallery"> stop, >>> allow user to read/view; >>> next tab -> <div id="products"> stop, allow user to read/view; >>> next tab -> <aside> ignore, skip -> <div id="contactUs"> stop, allow >>> user to read/view; **** >>> >>> next tab -> <footer> ignore, skip -> return to top....”**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> But isn’t that a very inefficient way to get there?**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> Léonie.**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> -- **** >>> >>> Carpe diem.**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> *From:* harry.loots@googlemail.com [mailto:harry.loots@googlemail.com] *On >>> Behalf Of *Harry Loots >>> *Sent:* 27 March 2013 14:59 >>> *To:* Steve Faulkner >>> *Cc:* W3C WAI ig; Ian Hickson; JF >>> *Subject:* Re: Rethinking the necessities of ARIA landmark role "main" >>> and HTML5 <main> element**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> Hi again Steve**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> re:**** >>> >>> ... one principle is a thought experiment, the other is implemented and >>> used already, **** >>> >>> Which of the proposals are already implemented? I thought that "<main>" >>> was a proposal for 5.1?**** >>> >>> >>> I urge anyone who thinks Ian's idea is worthwhile to define how it would >>> work in practice and get implementers interested in making it real.**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> Here's how the Hixon proposal may work: >>> >>> tab -> (jump to) <header> ignore, skip -> (jump to) <nav> ignore, skip >>> -> (jump to) <aside> ignore, skip -> (jump to) <div id="gallery"> stop, >>> allow user to read/view; >>> next tab -> <div id="products"> stop, allow user to read/view; >>> next tab -> <aside> ignore, skip -> <div id="contactUs"> stop, allow >>> user to read/view; >>> next tab -> <footer> ignore, skip -> return to top....**** >>> >>> Regards**** >>> >>> Harry**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> On 27 March 2013 12:07, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote: >>> **** >>> >>> Hi Harry, **** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> and Ian's proposal will form a perfect fail-safe when authors do not use >>> role=main or <main>.**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> problem is its not a perfect fail safe I have actually looked into a >>> heuristic approach and like most heuristics it fails at times. From HTML >>> data I collected and reviewed [1] I found that exclusion was not a reliable >>> indicator. **** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> There is no reason why the two principles cannot co-exist**** >>> >>> >>> of course, bit one principle is a thought experiment, the other is >>> implemented and used already, I urge anyone who thinks Ian's idea is >>> worthwhile to define how it would work in practice and get implementers >>> interested in making it real.**** >>> >>> >>> [1] http://webdevdata.org/**** >>> >>> >>> >>> **** >>> >>> with regards >>> >>> -- >>> SteveF >>> HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> On 27 March 2013 10:50, Harry Loots <harry.loots@ieee.org> wrote:**** >>> >>> Steve**** >>> >>> you're right arguing is senseless...**** >>> >>> However, it's worth considering the principle Ian promotes:**** >>> >>> That the UA ignores (the way I understand what he proposes) >>> <header><nav><footer><aside><etc> and lands on <main>, e.g., (my >>> understanding/interpretation) by using a built-in short-cut key exposed to >>> all users.**** >>> >>> There is no reason why the two principles cannot co-exist, and Ian's >>> proposal will form a perfect fail-safe when authors do not use role=main or >>> <main>.**** >>> >>> Kind regards**** >>> >>> Harry**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> On 27 March 2013 11:14, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote: >>> **** >>> >>> Hi all, this discussion appears to be going nowhere >>> >>> We have landmark semantics that are interoperably supported across >>> browsers and AT, we have evidence to suggest that users find them useful. >>> We have mapping of landmarks built in to HTML structural elements (in >>> various stages of implementation) >>> We have evidence to suggest that authors understand how to implement >>> landmarks. >>> >>> >>> Then we have a thought experiment from hixie that says hey you don't >>> need those landmarks especially role=main. This idea has been brought up >>> over and over by Hixie (note it was rejected on his home turf at the >>> WHATWG) and never gained any traction, browser implementers rejected it in >>> favour of adding the <main> element ( a number of whom have already >>> implemented it). >>> >>> So we now have a method that works (is supported out of the box by AT) >>> and work is also happening to build upon it to provide a simple browser >>> built in skip to content feature that any user can make use of, so in time >>> the necessity of providing a skip link will diminish. >>> >>> It would therefore seem more productive to be debating other topics.**** >>> >>> >>> >>> **** >>> >>> with regards >>> >>> -- >>> SteveF >>> HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> On 27 March 2013 08:50, Léonie Watson <tink@tink.co.uk> wrote:**** >>> >>> Ian Hickson wrote: >>> "In the interface I am proposing, there is no repeated questioning. The >>> user indicates to the software that the user wishes to skip uninteresting >>> content and jump to interesting content, in a single action (exactly the >>> same kind of action as is used to jump to a header, or to jump to a >>> specific landmark role). Then, the user agent skips all uninteresting >>> content and jumps straight to the content the user wants (the same content >>> as would be marked with <main> or role=main)."**** >>> >>> >From the user's point of view I think this is right. The phrases >>> "interesting" and "uninteresting" are too subjective to be helpful, but >>> essentially a single command that moves focus to the start of the main >>> content area of the page is the goal. >>> >>> >From an implementation point of view I think this is inefficient. It's >>> more reliable and less process intensive to move from A to Z, than it is to >>> move from A, to B, to C, to D and so on until all that remains by a process >>> of elimination is Z. >>> >>> So if the goal is to have a single mechanism for moving directly to a >>> given point on the page, what's the hook the UA uses to make that possible? >>> >>> >>> Léonie. >>> -- >>> Carpe diem.**** >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Ian Hickson [mailto:ian@hixie.ch] >>> Sent: 27 March 2013 02:11 >>> To: JF >>> Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org >>> Subject: RE: Rethinking the necessities of ARIA landmark role "main" and >>> HTML5 <main> element**** >>> >>> On Tue, 26 Mar 2013, JF wrote: >>> > >>> > A man arrives at the San Jose airport in Silicon Valley. >>> > >>> > "I want to go to the campus" he tells the cab driver. >>> > >>> > "The Stanford campus?", asks the cabbie. >>> > >>> > [...] >>> >>> Could you explain to me how this analogy corresponds to the discussion? >>> In the interface I am proposing, there is no repeated questioning. The user >>> indicates to the software that the user wishes to skip uninteresting >>> content and jump to interesting content, in a single action (exactly the >>> same kind of action as is used to jump to a header, or to jump to a >>> specific landmark role). Then, the user agent skips all uninteresting >>> content and jumps straight to the content the user wants (the same content >>> as would be marked with <main> or role=main). >>> >>> The user experience is _exactly_ the same as the experience possible >>> with explicit landmark roles. The only difference is how it is marked up. >>> >>> -- >>> Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL >>> http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. >>> Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.' >>> >>> **** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >> >> >
Received on Thursday, 28 March 2013 10:32:47 UTC