RE: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

This point originally concerned which character to use IF you use a character to separate links. It did NOT say that this was the preferred method. On Mon, May 12, 2008 2:18 am, Jens-Uwe Korff wrote: >> Screen-reader users have said that the vertical bar is THEIR preferred > character > > Really?

RE: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

> Screen-reader users have said that the vertical bar is THEIR preferred character Really? Do you have any data supporting your claim? I'm happy to learn more since we cannot conduct user tests on our end. As was pointed out before, I thought a read of "List. 5 items. Item one: "". Item two:

Re: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

Rob Kirton wrote: I'd be highly surprised if a screen reader manages to read CSS. Most struggle with HTML But the screen reader doesn't need to read the CSS, as the DOM already makes it quite clear where each link starts/stops, and screen readers can easily distinguish between them even wit

RE: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rob Kirton > Sent: Friday, May 09, 2008 7:00 AM > To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org > Subject: Re: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links > > Darren > > I'd be highly surprised if a screen reader manages to rea

RE: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

n Behalf Of Darren West Sent: 09 May 2008 12:53 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links "The reason for putting the character there in the first place is explicitly to help screen-reader users distinguish between links." It is my understanding tha

Re: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On > Behalf Of *Darren West > *Sent:* 09 May 2008 12:53 > *To:* wsg@webstandardsgroup.org > *Subject:* Re: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links > > "The reason for putting the character there in the first place is > explicitly to help screen-reade

RE: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

ent: 09 May 2008 12:53 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links "The reason for putting the character there in the first place is explicitly to help screen-reader users distinguish between links." It is my understanding that the fact that they are s

RE: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

ith either. Steve _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darren West Sent: 09 May 2008 12:53 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links "The reason for putting the character there in the first place is explicitly to

Re: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

"The reason for putting the character there in the first place is explicitly to help screen-reader users distinguish between links." It is my understanding that the fact that they are seperate links is what distinguishes between links ... "Screen-reader users have said that the vertical bar is T

RE: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

The reason for putting the character there in the first place is explicitly to help screen-reader users distinguish between links. Screen-reader users have said that the vertical bar is THEIR preferred character (even though this means repeating "vertical bar") since it is not used for anything el

RE: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

> The most common separator used in such circumstances ... is the vertical bar...whilst it is quite "wordy" That's the reason why I've started *not* to use it anymore. I'm using borders instead and add the class "last" to the last list element to apply no borders at all. Whilst a border is slight

Re: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

On Thu, 8 May 2008 15:52:38 +0100 (BST), Stuart Foulstone wrote: > From a usability/accessibility point a view. > > The most common separator used in such circumstances (and therefore that most > expected > by screen-reader users) is the vertical bar. > How about a border?

Re: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

What is the current thinking on this? How can I do this WITHOUT putting any > characters in there? I don't want any characters in there! > You could put the two links into a list. That would separate them into two disctinct elements without requiring punctuation. I'm not 100% sure of the usabilit

Re: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

>From a usability/accessibility point a view. The most common separator used in such circumstances (and therefore that most expected by screen-reader users) is the vertical bar. i.e. IF you add extra characters for accessibility, use the ones they are familiar with (usability). Addition: apparen

Re: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

On 08-May-08, at 2:33 PM, Designer wrote: The WAI validator complains [...] Do you have to build a WAI-validating site? If you don't have to, I would suggest ignoring that guideline, as it doesn't necessarily enhance accessibility for visitors. I would suggest using :focus to provide vis

Re: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

Hi Bob, I have run into a problem with having two adjacent links at the top of a page. You can use a list as someone mentioned, you can also add a hidden character. Example: [Site Map | Home] The span would be style with: div#sitelink span { position : absolut

Re: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 10:03 AM, Designer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "10.5 Until user agents (including assistive technologies) render adjacent > links distinctly, include non-link, printable characters (surrounded by > spaces) between adjacent links. [Priority 3]" > > What is the current thinki

Re: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

I tend to use a good old unordered list for such things Bob. - Original Message - From: "Designer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 10:03 AM Subject: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links I have run into a problem with having two adjacent links at the top of a page.