RE: Accesskeys

Thanks Charles,

 

Background - much appreciated!

 

I'm one of those folk dependent on ATs  to develop websites, documents, etc.

 

So we're stuck in the very problem we're trying to resolve.

 

Onwards and upwards!

 

Howard (Leicester)

 

 

  _____  

From: chaals@yandex-team.ru [mailto:chaals@yandex-team.ru] 
Sent: 24 October 2014 10:29
To: howard_leicester@btconnect.com; 'John Foliot'; 'Oscar Cao'; 'WAI
Interest Group'
Subject: Re: Accesskeys

 

 

 

24.10.2014, 10:59, "Howard Leicester" <howard_leicester@btconnect.com>:

AccessKeys have conflicts with many Assistive Technologies.

This is probably a true statement, but far too general to be helpful :S

So, I think I've seen some WAI comment in the past and some UK sites are
following this approach, that: AccessKeys are best avoided because of AT
conflicts.

The area of general keyboard access remains problematic (under the above).

Yeah. In the case where people provide keyboard access through javascript
(which is sadly very common), there are conflicts with even more things.

 

As a simple example, twitter.com conflicts with at least two of my everyday
mainstream browsers, which it wouldn't do if it had used accesskey

But AT conflicts seems an uncharted and addressed topic in general.

Actually there has been a lot of charting and attempting to address the
problem.

 

The situation today is probably under-documented, since the current approach
of the industry has been to avoid accesskey and use javascript instead,
which means there is far less effort put into documentation and
implementation than there was in the previous decade.

 

For various reasons using javascrip instead is generally *even*worse* than
using accesskey, and often *much*worse* :(

 

cheers

 

--

Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com