*I have started a new thread for this discussion, as not to hijack the
thread on skip links.*
Thanks for the reply Steve. As I said, it is another school of thought (not
necessarily my own). I wouldn’t use content first source ordering for
commercial implementations as the overhead of relocating
An interesting discussion...
Back in 2006, Roger Hudson, Lisa Miller and I conducted testing on three
aspects associated with screen reader use (skip links, source order and
structural lables).
The findings regarding source order:
t appears that when visiting a web page, most, if not all,
...@webstandardsgroup.org] On
Behalf Of Russ Weakley
Sent: 05 June 2012 23:53
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Source order of content / navigation
An interesting discussion...
Back in 2006, Roger Hudson, Lisa Miller and I conducted testing on three
aspects associated with screen
ooops. Reference:
http://usability.com.au/resources/source-order.cfm#conclusion
t appears that when visiting a web page, most, if not all, screen reader
users expect at least the main site navigation to be presented before the
content of the page. There appears to be little evidence to
On 13/10/07 (09:21) JonMarc said:
with all the skips and jump tos and methods for pulling links and
whatnots, i wonder how many people using screen readers ever make it down
there to the footer/copyright/whatever-else-you-put-there
Remember that screen reader applications can commonly call up a
Rick Lecoat wrote:
Remember that screen reader applications can commonly call up a handy
list of all the links on a page
Has anyone tested how skip links work from a link list?
I have a little theory called the hierarchy of link specificity
that I've been meaning to write up for years. The
Terrence Wood wrote:
It goes something like this: with a reverse source order (content before
nav) content specific links will always appear before the current
section nav ,main nav, and utility links - this should have the effect
of allowing the most relevant (to the current context) links
If you landed on the page from a search result and it's not the page
you want... can we assume that it be close, given you clicked to
there in the first place?
Patrick, I suspect your assumptions are way bigger than mine on this
one :-)
But, like I said, it's a theory (untested), so we
agreed, good message Ben...
something this thread made me think about that i really hadn't considered
before, and can't recall reading about anywhere (granted i am new around
here):
with all the skips and jump tos and methods for pulling links and
whatnots, i wonder how many people using screen
JonMarc Wright wrote:
i wonder how many people using screen readers ever make it
down there to the footer/copyright/whatever-else-you-put-there
I wonder how many sighted users make it down there as well, because for
the most part that section of a page can be happily ignored unless
you're
October 2007 09:22
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] source order
agreed, good message Ben...
something this thread made me think about that i really hadn't considered
before, and can't recall reading about anywhere (granted i am new around
here):
with all the skips and jump tos
Remember that a screen reader user has no idea how long a page is
until they get to the end. They may be one line from the end, yet still
have no idea what percentage is left.
I'd have thought that would be a fairly useful feature to have. I often
judge whether I'm going to read something
On 10/10/07 (23:03) russ said:
../ snip /..
However, most people would agree that:
1. consistency across the site is the most important thing (changing the
source order on different pages could cause a great deal of confusion).
2. if navigation comes before content, skip links are valuable for
Is there a prevailing wisdom in this matter?
Content first? Or navigation first?
This is a jury is still out issue since nobody has comprehensive
data, just small studies and opinion informed by observation of a
relatively small number of users.
What I think we can say for sure:
1) No matter
Ben, this is damn fine summary.
kind regards
Terrence Wood.
On 11/10/2007, at 12:40 PM, Ben Buchanan wrote:
Is there a prevailing wisdom in this matter?
Content first? Or navigation first?
This is a jury is still out issue since nobody has comprehensive
data, just small studies and opinion
Hi there;
I'm currently laying down the markup for a site and have been pondering
whether to put page content above navigation in the source. I often read
that this is a good idea, and that makes perfect sense to me as long as
there are skip links so that people can reach the navigation easily,
Rick Lecoat wrote:
Hi there;
I'm currently laying down the markup for a site and have been pondering
whether to put page content above navigation in the source. I often read
that this is a good idea, and that makes perfect sense to me as long as
there are skip links so that people can reach the
I think that on the first place must be content, and only after that -
navigation.
Sorry for the poor English
2007/10/10, Rick Lecoat [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi there;
I'm currently laying down the markup for a site and have been pondering
whether to put page content above navigation in the
To: Web Standards Group
Subject: [WSG] source order
Hi there;
I'm currently laying down the markup for a site and have been pondering
whether to put page content above navigation in the source. I often read
that this is a good idea, and that makes perfect sense to me as long as
there are skip
Rick Lecoat wrote:
Is there a prevailing wisdom in this matter? Content first? Or
navigation first?
Point 4 in this article...
http://www.afb.org/Section.asp?SectionID=57TopicID=167DocumentID=2757
...seems to indicate content first as best, with the navigation first
with skip link to content
Is there a prevailing wisdom in this matter?
Content first? Or navigation first?
You're probably referring to this:
It is our view, that a continuation of the practice of placing navigation
before the content of the page will benefit some screen reader users, in
particular those users who are
To: Web Standards Group
Subject: [WSG] source order
Hi there;
I'm currently laying down the markup for a site and have been pondering
whether to put page content above navigation in the source. I often read
that this is a good idea, and that makes perfect sense to me as long as
there are skip
russ - maxdesign wrote:
2. if navigation comes before content, skip links are valuable for certain
types of users.
And if you have content first, would you have a skip to navigation
link before it? :)
P
--
Patrick H. Lauke
__
Mike Brown wrote:
I think the article http://usability.com.au/resources/source-order.cfm
*is* the prevailing wisdom in this matter :)
Which is to say, some testing with a very specific design was used
(with very little content or navigation), and that's all we have to go
on so far.
An endless debate. And this is before opening up the other aspect of the
debate... How source order affects Google rank :)
also .. what about users of small-screen devices like mobile phones where
lots of scrolling quickly becomes a pain?
then to make matter worse there is the issue of
Put the 'main' 4-5 menu links up the top and then content with the extra
navigation (sidebar of blogs etc) afterwards or even not include it in
the mobile css
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/10/2007 10:24:30 am
An endless debate. And this is before opening up the other aspect of
the
debate... How
26 matches
Mail list logo
