- From: Al Gilman <asgilman@access.digex.net>
- Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1998 15:31:33 -0500 (EST)
- To: jongund@staff.uiuc.edu (Jon Gunderson)
- Cc: danson@miseri.edu, kitch@afb.org, w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
to follow up on what Jon Gunderson said: > I think the type of searching Al is talking about is very > useful in the case you know what you are looking for. But, we > also want to help user who are just trying to explore new > pages, so searching just headers by creating a list of just the > headers is very useful. The user can then sequentially move > though just the headers. > The question I have is can this be considered a search or > should we have a different label like direct navigation? Auto-generating a table of contents by collecting the headers and find/find-next stepping through the hits for a match pattern could both be viewed as _sifting_ the document to create a navigation infrastructure for the document. But in the common parlance, I think people will only recognize the second one as "searching." The left-margin Table of Contents display reduces _structure navigation_ for the document to _link following_, a more primitive class of method. I think that to communicate with people from outside the working group we will need to distinguish at least three classes of transactions: Structure navigation (e.g. go-to-next-H2) (compare: go to start page in immediately enclosing directory) Direct navigation (e.g. go-to-clickable-number-47) (compare: go to URL) Content searching (e.g. go-to-first-occurrence-of(match-pattern)) (compare: do you Yahoo?) Al > Jon > > > > At 10:06 PM 11/10/98 -0500, Al Gilman wrote: > >Searching only the header text or only the link text is > >potentially of benefit, but only after basic searching of all the > >text and navigation from hit to hit [probably starting with the > >user positioned at the first hit] is in place. > > > >Documents are a blend of form and content. Very often what the > >author provides in terms of form by means of Hn elements > >etc. fails to expose what makes the content interesting to the > >reader. In that case the reader resorts to content-wise access > >methods such as matching substrings. > > > >It is my experience that web wanderers who are blind use string > >search keys a lot to tell one another how to find something on > >the web. I hypothesize that this is because the infrastructure > >of headers is a) not normally navigable, but more importantly b) > >not designed with the grain size of their display interface > >[roughly speaking the line, not the screenful] in mind. > > > >The content-addressed mode of getting around is generally > >applicable to all text, not just structured or hyperlinked text. > >As a result it is more universal and not dependent on the grain > >size of the display channel, so blind users fall back on it a lot > >because the headers that are adaptive for the sighted users don't > >perform so well in sound. Higher levels of structuring get > >captured into the rhythms of one or another display medium. The > >more primitive modalities don't, so their utility survives > >changes in the UI details. > > > >Al > > > >to follow up on what Jon Gunderson said: > > > >> I think we are looking for ways to navigate by content. One way to think > >> of searching is to create a list of all the headers allow some one to > >> search that list of headers sequentially, by numeric position or by > >> alphabetic letters. > >> Jon > >> > >> > >> At 10:19 AM 11/6/98 -0500, Denis Anson wrote: > >> >Jon, > >> > > >> >I think we need to keep in mind the distinction between searching, > browsing, > >> >and actually getting information from the web. > >> > > >> >In my doctoral course, Teaching and Learning on the Web, we are doing a > >> lot of > >> >web based research for focus papers. We look at resources on the web, > >> >including on-line journals and the like. We frequently read this articles > >> (at > >> >least skim them) on the web. If our navigation were combined with a > list of > >> >links, we would be able to get to the top of the article, the bottom of > the > >> >article, and perhaps an occasional internal link. But we might have pages > >> of > >> >information that was inaccessible to keyboard navigation. > >> > > >> >No, I think we need a way to navigate the *content* of the page as well as > >> the > >> >links off of the page. > >> > > >> >Denis > >> > > >> >On Wednesday, November 04, 1998 10:45 AM, Jon Gunderson > >> >[SMTP:jongund@staff.uiuc.edu] wrote: > >> >> I think the current guidelines put direct navigation into searching, > since > >> >> when it is discussed it usuaully refers to bring up a list of elements > >> >> (i.e. links) and have the user use a numeric or aphabetic key board > >> >> commands to move through the list. I am not sure there is a big > >> >> distinction between this type of direct navigation and the general > concept > >> >> of searching. It potentially may be an easier sell, if it is > discussed as > >> >> searching (since many user agents already have search functions) than as > >> >> some new keyboard based technique. > >> >> > >> >> What do people think about combining direct navigation with search > >> functions? > >> >> > >> >> Jon > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> At 09:12 AM 11/4/98 -0500, Kitch Barnicle wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> >In the "navigation" sections of the guidelines and techniques it > seems as > >> >> >though we primarily refer to sequential navigation. Has the concept of > >> >> >direct navigation been folded into searching? To me the notion of > >> >> >searching implies an extra step. While I think providing multiple > ways to > >> >> >search for items on a page is important, I don't want to totally > lose the > >> >> >concept of directly moving to a link or active element. What do people > >> >> >think? Am I missing something? > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> >Also, I am not sure what 5.6.3 means, "Allow the user to search for > a link > >> >> >in the current document based on its position." Is this guideline a > >> >> >substitute for providing numbered links? > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> >Thanks, > >> >> >Kitch > >> >> > > >> >> Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP > >> >> Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology > >> >> Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services > >> >> University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign > >> >> 1207 S. Oak Street > >> >> Champaign, IL 61820 > >> >> > >> >> Voice: 217-244-5870 > >> >> Fax: 217-333-0248 > >> >> E-mail: jongund@uiuc.edu > >> >> WWW: http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/~jongund > >> >> http://www.als.uiuc.edu/InfoTechAccess > >> > > >> Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP > >> Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology > >> Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services > >> University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign > >> 1207 S. Oak Street > >> Champaign, IL 61820 > >> > >> Voice: 217-244-5870 > >> Fax: 217-333-0248 > >> E-mail: jongund@uiuc.edu > >> WWW: http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/~jongund > >> http://www.als.uiuc.edu/InfoTechAccess > >> > > > Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP > Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology > Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services > University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign > 1207 S. Oak Street > Champaign, IL 61820 > > Voice: 217-244-5870 > Fax: 217-333-0248 > E-mail: jongund@uiuc.edu > WWW: http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/~jongund > http://www.als.uiuc.edu/InfoTechAccess >
Received on Thursday, 12 November 1998 15:31:55 UTC