W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 2015

Re: "Bypass Blocks" Question

From: Rakesh <prakesh369@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2015 20:29:58 +0530
Message-ID: <CAD0dgbHkCHoBPZM3bPJWaJLdUy-Wg_5vFr+1dK3vxZ_8soS6rA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mandana Eibegger <mandana@schoener.at>
Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Hello Mandana,

Though I personally recommend having Skip link, it is sufficient to
have any one of the following.
1. Skip link.
2. Proper heading structure.
3. Proper ARIA landmarks.

Yes, I feel HTML 5 elements such as main, aside, nav serve the same
purpose. Just ensure that these HTML 5 elements work as expected on
all targeted browsers.
I think worth looking at the following article
http://www.maxability.co.in/2013/02/bypass-blocks/
Thanks & Regards
Rakesh
On 7/8/15, Mandana Eibegger <mandana@schoener.at> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> i have a question concerning the Success Criterion 2.4.1 "Bypass Blocks".
>
> For this SC there is the Sufficient Technique
> "ARIA11: Using ARIA landmarks to identify regions of a page (ARIA)"
>
> And an Advisory Technique
> "Using accessibility supported technologies which allow structured
> navigation by user agents and assistive technologies (future link) "
>
> Does HTML5 count as an "accessibility supported technology" in the
> meantime?
> So, would using <main><header> etc be sufficient to support bypassing of
> blocks?
>
> And what about users, not using AT (just tabbing in the browser)?
> Wouldn't it still be necessary to implement skip-links and access-keys
> to make a webpage accessible?
>
> Thank you,
> Mandana
>
>


-- 
Best Regards
Rakesh Paladugula
www.maxability.co.in
Received on Wednesday, 8 July 2015 15:00:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:57 UTC