RE: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

2008-05-12 Thread Stuart Foulstone

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? 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:  etc.

 was good enough.

 Cheers,

 Jens

 The information contained in this e-mail message and any accompanying
 files is or may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient,
 any use, dissemination, reliance, forwarding, printing or copying of this
 e-mail or any attached files is unauthorised. This e-mail is subject to
 copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, adapted or communicated
 without the written consent of the copyright owner. If you have received
 this e-mail in error please advise the sender immediately by return e-mail
 or telephone and delete all copies. Fairfax does not guarantee the
 accuracy or completeness of any information contained in this e-mail or
 attached files. Internet communications are not secure, therefore Fairfax
 does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message or
 attached files.


 ***
 List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
 Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ***






***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



RE: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

2008-05-11 Thread Jens-Uwe Korff
 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:  etc.

was good enough.

Cheers,
 
Jens 

The information contained in this e-mail message and any accompanying files is 
or may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, 
dissemination, reliance, forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail or any 
attached files is unauthorised. This e-mail is subject to copyright. No part of 
it should be reproduced, adapted or communicated without the written consent of 
the copyright owner. If you have received this e-mail in error please advise 
the sender immediately by return e-mail or telephone and delete all copies. 
Fairfax does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of any information 
contained in this e-mail or attached files. Internet communications are not 
secure, therefore Fairfax does not accept legal responsibility for the contents 
of this message or attached files.


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



RE: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

2008-05-09 Thread Jens-Uwe Korff
 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 slightly higher than a vertical bar it avoids
screenreaders to go

home vertical bar latest posts vertical bar contact us vertical bar
sitemap vertical bar 

Cheers,
 
Jens 

The information contained in this e-mail message and any accompanying files is 
or may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, 
dissemination, reliance, forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail or any 
attached files is unauthorised. This e-mail is subject to copyright. No part of 
it should be reproduced, adapted or communicated without the written consent of 
the copyright owner. If you have received this e-mail in error please advise 
the sender immediately by return e-mail or telephone and delete all copies. 
Fairfax does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of any information 
contained in this e-mail or attached files. Internet communications are not 
secure, therefore Fairfax does not accept legal responsibility for the contents 
of this message or attached files.


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



RE: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

2008-05-09 Thread Stuart Foulstone
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 else and can't be confused.

Border is, of course, purely presentational and of no use whatsoever to
screen-readers and, therefore, does not fulfill accessibility
requirements.



On Fri, May 9, 2008 7:31 am, Jens-Uwe Korff wrote:
 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 slightly higher than a vertical bar it avoids
 screenreaders to go

 home vertical bar latest posts vertical bar contact us vertical bar
 sitemap vertical bar 

 Cheers,

 Jens

 The information contained in this e-mail message and any accompanying
 files is or may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient,
 any use, dissemination, reliance, forwarding, printing or copying of this
 e-mail or any attached files is unauthorised. This e-mail is subject to
 copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, adapted or communicated
 without the written consent of the copyright owner. If you have received
 this e-mail in error please advise the sender immediately by return e-mail
 or telephone and delete all copies. Fairfax does not guarantee the
 accuracy or completeness of any information contained in this e-mail or
 attached files. Internet communications are not secure, therefore Fairfax
 does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message or
 attached files.


 ***
 List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
 Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ***






***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

2008-05-09 Thread Darren West
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 THEIR preferred
character (even though this means repeating vertical bar) since it is
not used for anything else and can't be confused.

Prefered to a list?


2008/5/9 Stuart Foulstone [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 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 else and can't be confused.

 Border is, of course, purely presentational and of no use whatsoever to
 screen-readers and, therefore, does not fulfill accessibility
 requirements.



 On Fri, May 9, 2008 7:31 am, Jens-Uwe Korff wrote:
  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 slightly higher than a vertical bar it avoids
  screenreaders to go
 
  home vertical bar latest posts vertical bar contact us vertical bar
  sitemap vertical bar 
 
  Cheers,
 
  Jens
 
  The information contained in this e-mail message and any accompanying
  files is or may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient,
  any use, dissemination, reliance, forwarding, printing or copying of this
  e-mail or any attached files is unauthorised. This e-mail is subject to
  copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, adapted or communicated
  without the written consent of the copyright owner. If you have received
  this e-mail in error please advise the sender immediately by return
 e-mail
  or telephone and delete all copies. Fairfax does not guarantee the
  accuracy or completeness of any information contained in this e-mail or
  attached files. Internet communications are not secure, therefore Fairfax
  does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message or
  attached files.
 
 
  ***
  List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
  Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
  Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  ***
 
 




 ***
 List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
 Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ***




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

2008-05-09 Thread Steve Green
The rationale for this checkpoint seems to have been long forgotten, and I
don't know of any user agent that has a problem with adjacent links. Nor
does anyone else it seems, which is why the WCAG Samurai recommended that
the checkpoint should be ignored.
 
It certainly isn't a problem for any screen reader I am aware of. I have
heard it said that it relates to some types of Braille display but no one
seems to be able to provide examples. I can imagine that user agents would
have a problem with adjacent links if they were relying on scraping the
screen rather than reading the source, and some did work that way but I
don't know any that do now.
 
Most users are unaware of how pages are marked up so I don't think that they
would have a preference for lists, vertical bars or anything else. During
user testing we encounter both, and have not observed problems with 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 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 THEIR preferred
character (even though this means repeating vertical bar) since it is
not used for anything else and can't be confused.

Prefered to a list?



2008/5/9 Stuart Foulstone [EMAIL PROTECTED]:


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 else and can't be confused.

Border is, of course, purely presentational and of no use whatsoever to
screen-readers and, therefore, does not fulfill accessibility
requirements.



On Fri, May 9, 2008 7:31 am, Jens-Uwe Korff wrote:
 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 slightly higher than a vertical bar it avoids
 screenreaders to go

 home vertical bar latest posts vertical bar contact us vertical bar
 sitemap vertical bar 

 Cheers,

 Jens

 The information contained in this e-mail message and any accompanying
 files is or may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient,
 any use, dissemination, reliance, forwarding, printing or copying of this
 e-mail or any attached files is unauthorised. This e-mail is subject to
 copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, adapted or communicated
 without the written consent of the copyright owner. If you have received
 this e-mail in error please advise the sender immediately by return e-mail
 or telephone and delete all copies. Fairfax does not guarantee the
 accuracy or completeness of any information contained in this e-mail or
 attached files. Internet communications are not secure, therefore Fairfax
 does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message or
 attached files.


 ***
 List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
 Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ***






***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

2008-05-09 Thread Darren Lovelock
The content:after pseudo class can be used to seperate the links with a
vertical bar. 
 
It wont work in Internet Explorer but I believe it will still work with
screen readers (although at this point in time I cannot find anything that
confirms this).
 
That said, it's far more logical to just seperate the links using a list, as
Stuart has already stated.
 
Regards,
 
Darren Lovelock
Munky Online Web Design
 http://www.munkyonline.co.uk/ http://www.munkyonline.co.uk
T: +44 (0)20-8816-8893

  _  

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 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 THEIR preferred
character (even though this means repeating vertical bar) since it is
not used for anything else and can't be confused.

Prefered to a list?



2008/5/9 Stuart Foulstone [EMAIL PROTECTED]:


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 else and can't be confused.

Border is, of course, purely presentational and of no use whatsoever to
screen-readers and, therefore, does not fulfill accessibility
requirements.



On Fri, May 9, 2008 7:31 am, Jens-Uwe Korff wrote:
 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 slightly higher than a vertical bar it avoids
 screenreaders to go

 home vertical bar latest posts vertical bar contact us vertical bar
 sitemap vertical bar 

 Cheers,

 Jens

 The information contained in this e-mail message and any accompanying
 files is or may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient,
 any use, dissemination, reliance, forwarding, printing or copying of this
 e-mail or any attached files is unauthorised. This e-mail is subject to
 copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, adapted or communicated
 without the written consent of the copyright owner. If you have received
 this e-mail in error please advise the sender immediately by return e-mail
 or telephone and delete all copies. Fairfax does not guarantee the
 accuracy or completeness of any information contained in this e-mail or
 attached files. Internet communications are not secure, therefore Fairfax
 does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message or
 attached files.


 ***
 List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
 Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ***






***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

2008-05-09 Thread Rob Kirton
Darren

I'd be highly surprised if a screen reader manages to read CSS.  Most
struggle with HTML

-- 
Regards

- Rob

Raising web standards : http://ele.vation.co.uk
Linking in with others : http://linkedin.com/in/robkirton

2008/5/9 Darren Lovelock [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

  The content:after pseudo class can be used to seperate the links with a
 vertical bar.

 It wont work in Internet Explorer but I believe it will still work with
 screen readers (although at this point in time I cannot find anything that
 confirms this).

 That said, it's far more logical to just seperate the links using a list,
 as Stuart has already stated.

 Regards,

  Darren Lovelock
 Munky Online Web Design
 http://www.munkyonline.co.uk
 T: +44 (0)20-8816-8893

  --
 *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 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 THEIR preferred
 character (even though this means repeating vertical bar) since it is
 not used for anything else and can't be confused.

 Prefered to a list?


 2008/5/9 Stuart Foulstone [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 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 else and can't be confused.

 Border is, of course, purely presentational and of no use whatsoever to
 screen-readers and, therefore, does not fulfill accessibility
 requirements.



 On Fri, May 9, 2008 7:31 am, Jens-Uwe Korff wrote:
  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 slightly higher than a vertical bar it avoids
  screenreaders to go
 
  home vertical bar latest posts vertical bar contact us vertical bar
  sitemap vertical bar 
 
  Cheers,
 
  Jens
 
  The information contained in this e-mail message and any accompanying
  files is or may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient,
  any use, dissemination, reliance, forwarding, printing or copying of
 this
  e-mail or any attached files is unauthorised. This e-mail is subject to
  copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, adapted or communicated
  without the written consent of the copyright owner. If you have received
  this e-mail in error please advise the sender immediately by return
 e-mail
  or telephone and delete all copies. Fairfax does not guarantee the
  accuracy or completeness of any information contained in this e-mail or
  attached files. Internet communications are not secure, therefore
 Fairfax
  does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message or
  attached files.
 
 
  ***
  List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
  Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
  Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  ***
 
 




 ***
 List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
 Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ***



 ***
 List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
 Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ***

 ***
 List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
 Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ***



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

2008-05-09 Thread Darren Lovelock
Yeah you're quite probably right. I just thought i'd read that somewhere
recently. Must have been for something else!
 
Cheers,
 
Darren

  _  

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Rob Kirton
Sent: 09 May 2008 15:00
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links


Darren

I'd be highly surprised if a screen reader manages to read CSS.  Most
struggle with HTML

-- 
Regards

- Rob 

Raising web standards : http://ele.vation.co.uk
Linking in with others : http://linkedin.com/in/robkirton


2008/5/9 Darren Lovelock [EMAIL PROTECTED]:


The content:after pseudo class can be used to seperate the links with a
vertical bar. 
 
It wont work in Internet Explorer but I believe it will still work with
screen readers (although at this point in time I cannot find anything that
confirms this).
 
That said, it's far more logical to just seperate the links using a list, as
Stuart has already stated.
 
Regards,
 


Darren Lovelock
Munky Online Web Design
 http://www.munkyonline.co.uk/ http://www.munkyonline.co.uk
T: +44 (0)20-8816-8893

  _  

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 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 THEIR preferred
character (even though this means repeating vertical bar) since it is
not used for anything else and can't be confused.

Prefered to a list?



2008/5/9 Stuart Foulstone [EMAIL PROTECTED]:


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 else and can't be confused.

Border is, of course, purely presentational and of no use whatsoever to
screen-readers and, therefore, does not fulfill accessibility
requirements.



On Fri, May 9, 2008 7:31 am, Jens-Uwe Korff wrote:
 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 slightly higher than a vertical bar it avoids
 screenreaders to go

 home vertical bar latest posts vertical bar contact us vertical bar
 sitemap vertical bar 

 Cheers,

 Jens

 The information contained in this e-mail message and any accompanying
 files is or may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient,
 any use, dissemination, reliance, forwarding, printing or copying of this
 e-mail or any attached files is unauthorised. This e-mail is subject to
 copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, adapted or communicated
 without the written consent of the copyright owner. If you have received
 this e-mail in error please advise the sender immediately by return e-mail
 or telephone and delete all copies. Fairfax does not guarantee the
 accuracy or completeness of any information contained in this e-mail or
 attached files. Internet communications are not secure, therefore Fairfax
 does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message or
 attached files.


 ***
 List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
 Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ***






***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*** 




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help

RE: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

2008-05-09 Thread Thierry Koblentz
 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 read CSS.  Most 
 struggle with HTML

To a certain degree they do. That's why Mike suggested - in his example - to 
hide the SPANs containg the pipe character using:

span {position:absolute;left:-em;}

rather than

span {display:none;}

-- 
Regards,
Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com






***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

2008-05-09 Thread Patrick H. Lauke

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 without any characters, gaps, 
whatever between them...


P
--
Patrick H. Lauke
__
re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively
[latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]
www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk
http://redux.deviantart.com
__
Co-lead, Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force
http://webstandards.org/
__


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

2008-05-08 Thread Ian Chamberlain
I tend to use a good old unordered list for such things Bob.

- Original Message - 
From: Designer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
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. The WAI validator complains:

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 thinking on this? How can I do this WITHOUT putting 
any characters in there? I don't emwant/em any characters in there! 
  I have tried using:

div id=sitelink
 p
   [a href=sitemap.htmlSite Map/a]
   [a href=../../core/noticeboard.htmlHome/a]
 /p
   /div

and that validates WAI, but I hate the appearance of it. I could set the 
(non a:) text colour to be the same as the background, but that's a 
fiddle I want to avoid.

Any help would be very much appreciated.

Thanks,

Bob





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

2008-05-08 Thread Matthew Pennell
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 thinking on this? How can I do this WITHOUT putting
 any characters in there? I don't emwant/em any characters in there!


Do not add non-link, printable characters (surrounded by spaces or not)
between adjacent links unless the semantics of the document naturally would
include such characters.

From the WCAG Samurai corrections to WCAG1:
http://wcagsamurai.org/errata/errata.html

So basically, don't worry about using anything between links.

http://www.thewatchmakerproject.com/journal/455/wcag-samurai-question

-- 

- Matthew


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

2008-05-08 Thread Mike at Green-Beast.com

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:


div id=sitelink
p
  [a href=sitemap.htmlSite Map/a
span | /span
  a href=../../core/noticeboard.htmlHome/a]
/p
  /div

The span would be style with:

div#sitelink span {
 position : absolute;
 left : -9000px;
}

Cheers.
Mike Cherim 




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

2008-05-08 Thread Rahul Gonsalves

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 visual cues - most modern screen readers are able to  
differentiate between adjacent links without difficulty.


You can use a list as someone mentioned, you can also add a hidden  
character. [...]



@Mike: Adding extra characters just increases the auditory clutter  
that screenreader-users have to experience. While your method is a  
good one if WAI-valid is necessary, I must respectfully disagree with  
it on accessibility grounds :-).


Best,
 - Rahul.


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

2008-05-08 Thread Stuart Foulstone
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: apparently the vertical bar character was preferred by
screen-reader users because, whilst it is quite wordy, there is
virtually no other use for it, so very little opportunity for confusion.



On Thu, May 8, 2008 2:32 pm, Rahul Gonsalves wrote:
 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 visual cues - most modern screen readers are able to
 differentiate between adjacent links without difficulty.

 You can use a list as someone mentioned, you can also add a hidden
 character. [...]


 @Mike: Adding extra characters just increases the auditory clutter
 that screenreader-users have to experience. While your method is a
 good one if WAI-valid is necessary, I must respectfully disagree with
 it on accessibility grounds :-).

 Best,
   - Rahul.


 ***
 List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
 Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ***






***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

2008-05-08 Thread Ben Buchanan
What is the current thinking on this? How can I do this WITHOUT putting any
 characters in there? I don't emwant/em 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 usability aspect of having such a short nav list
thought - anyone have any thoughts on that?

Also, just another vote here to follow WCAG Samurai over raw WCAG 1. The
Samurai know their stuff and the Errata really capture the best practice
that emerged while working with WCAG 1 (many notes in WCAG 1 need
clarification or are no longer correct in their original form).

-Ben

-- 
--- http://weblog.200ok.com.au/
--- The future has arrived; it's just not
--- evenly distributed. - William Gibson


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links

2008-05-08 Thread David Hucklesby
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?

http://htmlfixit.com/tutes/tutorial_CSS_Generated_Faux_Pipe_Delimited_Unordered_List.php

Cordially,
David
--




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***