That looks ok, Mike. Remember to ensure markup logical blocks with <div> tags to separate out the sections else you'll run into trouble with nested headers.
I'd be inclined not to overdo the h4 (external) link headings unless you've got good reason to emphasise them. I use blocks of links on my resources pages categorised by h3 (although it could be any sequentially relevant) heading levels then non-headed outbound links as unordered lists. You may also want to consider incorporate 2 additional hidden links: jump to main menu and jump to content. These can be off-page (utilising negative margins) and should appear immediately after the opening body tag. My preferred method is to make them pop-up in CSS should users tab into them; they get a visual clue that they've entered tab navigation and are given the immediate option to get to what they want. Handy for vision impaired or motor-impaired keyboard-only users. It's also important to use tabbed highlights. This can help enormously when navigating complex, copy-intense pages. You'll make use of the a:focus event for Gecko browsers and the a:active event for Explorer. Keep the Explorer event in a separate CSS include which can be called up using the proprietary IE conditional clause like -- <!--[if IE]><link rel="stylesheet" href="css/domain_ie.css" type="text/css" media="all" /><![endif]--> You can see the effect of the above suggestion on http://www.seowebsitepromotion.com/resources.htm. Mike -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Mike Foskett Sent: 07 July 2004 15:55 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [WSG]headers Drew, Mike, So, if I get this right then technically speaking: <title>Page name - Site name</title> <div>Site name</div> [not visible & 2nd part of the <title> - Placed behind an image of the same] <h1>Content (Page name) heading</h1> [visible & 1st part of the <title>] <h2></h2> [repeat as required keeping all sub headings in the correct order] <h3></h3> <h2></h2> <h3></h3> <h4></h4> <h3></h3> <h2></h2> <div> <span>Navigation</span> [not visible, <span> is of no use to no-vision, but okay for lo-vision, users] [list of links] </div> <div> <span>External links</span> [not visible] <h2>link heading</h2> [this heading has to be a h2 because you cannot guarantee a h2 in the content] [text & link] <h2>link heading</h2> [text & link] </div> <div> <span>Footer links</span> [not visible] [list of links] </div> Note: [not visible] means you cannot see it but neither "visibility:hidden" nor "display:none" are used. Hmm. I have observed vision-impaired users skipping through <h?> tags as the preferred method of navigating a page. The tendency is not to use the access keys even though they happily know they are there. This is due I believe to inconsistencies in the declarations, and availability, on pages world-wide. My concern is now that by removing the <h?> tags from the navigation sections, I'm actually making the page a lot less accessible. For the best compromise while keeping it all accessible, I'm now considering: <title>Page name - Site name</title> <div>Site name</div> [not visible & 2nd part of the <title> - Placed behind an image of the same] <h1>Content (Page name) heading</h1> [visible & 1st part of the <title>] <h2></h2> [repeat as required, keeping all sub headings in the correct order] <h3></h3> <h2></h2> <h3></h3> <h4></h4> <h3></h3> <h2></h2> <h2>Navigation</h2> [not visible, <h2> is good for both no-vision and lo-vision users] [list of links] <h3>External links</h3> [not visible] <h4>link heading</h4> [text & link] <h4>link heading</h4> [text & link] <h3>Footer links</h3> [not visible] [list of links] Would that be in my best interest and a good balance? mike 2k:)2 ********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.mimesweeper.com ********************************************************************** ***************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ***************************************************** ***************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *****************************************************
