You could look at implementing a solution that uses -flex-box to change the orientation/order of your page elements at each break point.
Trent Walton originally wrote about it with his article, , before Jordan Moore expanded on the idea with http://www.jordanm.co.uk/post/21863299677/building-with-content-choreographyand was even nice enough to produce us a workable demo, http://www.jordanm.co.uk/contentchoreography and explains further http://www.jordanm.co.uk/contentchoreographydemo. On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 3:57 PM, <wsg@webstandardsgroup.org> wrote: > ********************************************************************* > WEB STANDARDS GROUP MAIL LIST DIGEST > ********************************************************************* > > > From: tee <weblis...@gmail.com> > Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 14:14:10 -0700 > Subject: Re: [WSG] Media queries and roles > > Don't know the answer for sure, but if you display none or make it > invisible AT would ignore it no? My logic is, display:none & invisible > should precede ARIA elements. If a site speficically told the AT not to > display a block of content, it shouldn't bother to annouce the role(s) > within it to confuse user. > > When doing RWD instead of mobile adaptation, that navigation goes to > the bottom of the page for the consideration of Mobile version, my > approach is to use absolute position to target the desktop version's > navigation instead of making duplication. > > tee > > > On May 24, 2012, at 1:12 PM, Tom Livingston wrote: > > > List, > > > > We have a project being worked on that is being done using RWD. For > > mobile, we are repeating the nav at the bottom of the page and > > showing/hiding - with display: block/none; - the appropriate navbar > > based on min-width media queries. > > > > My question is if the desktop main nav has a role of 'navigation', > > should the mobile nav at the bottom have that same role? Will that > > mess up screen readers et al? > > > > TIA > > > > -- > > ********************************************************************* > From: Tom Livingston <tom...@gmail.com> > Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 08:44:14 -0400 > Subject: Re: [WSG] Media queries and roles > > On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 5:14 PM, tee <weblis...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Don't know the answer for sure, but if you display none or make it invisi > ble AT would ignore it no? My logic is, display:none & invisible should pre > cede ARIA elements. If a site speficically told the AT not to display a blo > ck of content, it shouldn't bother to annouce the role(s) within it to conf > use user. > > > > When doing RWD instead of mobile adaptation, that navigation goes to t > he bottom of the page for the consideration of Mobile version, my approach > is to use absolute position to target the desktop version's navigation inst > ead of making duplication. > > > > tee > > > > > > On May 24, 2012, at 1:12 PM, Tom Livingston wrote: > > > >> List, > >> > > Thanks tee. My thoughts as well, but wasn't sure. > > Also, I thought of absolute pos., but I do not think the structure I > need will work with that. > > Thanks again > > -- > > Tom Livingston | Senior Interactive Developer | Media Logic | > ph: 518.456.3015x231 | fx: 518.456.4279 | mlinc.com > > ************************************************************** > Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm > Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org > ************************************************************** > > > -- Justin Avery *We Build Websites* http://justinavery.me http://www.twitter.com/justinavery ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *******************************************************************
