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 to"s 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 most sites have the major links duplicated down there at the bottom so the anyone who has scrolled down can navigate from there if they'd like. on the vast majority of websites, this comes ABOVE the copyright portion. the copyright portion is also usually where you find privacy notices, terms of service links, etc. i'm sure they can be found by someone using a screen reader if they look, but it just seems like someone listening to a page being read out would likely move on to a new location before the reader ever got down to that last section. any thoughts? On 10/11/07, Terrence Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 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 informed by observation of a > > relatively small number of users. > > > > What I think we can say for sure: > > > > 1) No matter which way you go, be consistent across the site so users > > can learn how your site works and trust it to work the same way as > > they move through the site. > > > > 2a) Either way, include skip/jump links; but > > 2b) Include visible skip links where possible or use > > invisible-but-accessible skip links (ie. do not use display: none; to > > hide skip links as a very large number of users will never be able to > > access them). If they are hidden, try to make them visible on focus so > > sighted keyboard users can see them. > > > > 3) Use meaningful link text and a logical heading structure. Not only > > is this just good practice and good for SEO... the > > accessibility-oriented reason people say this is that some (many? > > most?) screen reader users don't actually read a page from top to > > bottom. They use features which extract all the headings or links into > > a list; read just that list then use that to jump around content. Once > > they identify that they're on the page they really need, then and only > > then will they read the whole page. > > > > I will no doubt be corrected for saying this - please note that I am > > not saying *all* screen reader users do this. Screen Reader users have > > habits which are just as varied as other web users. No two people use > > the web in precisely the same way - but overall trends and common > > approaches can be identified. Enough disclaimer? :) > > > > cheers, > > 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] > > ******************************************************************* > > > > ******************************************************************* > 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] *******************************************************************
