|
| |
|
|
Nicole
Posts: 2992
Joined: 9/15/2004
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
 |
Accesskeys and Accessibility - 7/24/2005 19:40:28
I've recently finished creating accesskeys for the major links on my site, knowing that they can conflict with system keys alt + f is the File menu, i used numbers. But I've just learnt that numbers arre also used already to perform certain functions, and I thought I'd post this link here which explains just what letters and numbers are already in use for anyone who has set their own accesskeys.
Nicole
< Message edited by jaybee -- 7/30/2005 5:48:24 >
_____________________________
". . . and God created man in his image." errr, shouldn't that be "and man created God in his image'?
|
|
|
|
BobbyDouglas
Posts: 5577
Joined: 5/15/2003
From: Arizona
Status: offline
|
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/24/2005 20:28:01
Nicole, I moved this over to the Hints/Tips forum so more people will be able to see it. (I come here a lot for reference).
_____________________________
Arizona Web Design - Mr Bobs Web Design in Arizona
The Arizona Web Hosting Challenge
| |
|
|
|
caz
Posts: 3779
Joined: 10/10/2001
From: Somewhere south of Chester, UK
Status: offline
|
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/24/2005 21:40:34
Good find, Nicole. I went on to read the papers attached to that table and they confirm what I had already begun to suspect and that is that because there is no standardisation yet on access keys, conflicts occur so I am giving them a miss. Even the UK advice for their use ie. numbers is causing problems with authors adding their own to that list.
The future appears to be that acess keys will be replaced with access points in design. This will give the user agent the ability to allow the end user to specify their own. This is a long way down the line of course because it will be slated for xhtml2 as I understand it.
Meanwhile, OK so I can't claim high level accessibility unless I confuse some users then I can't, but I still do the best I can without confusion.
_____________________________
I remember when it took less than 4hrs to fly across the Atlantic.
| |
|
|
|
erbain
Posts: 1
Joined: 7/25/2005
Status: offline
|
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/25/2005 12:23:49
good work
| |
|
|
|
davids
Posts: 211
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Belgium (American)
Status: offline
|
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/27/2005 11:41:06
I have to enter the dissenting opinion on this. My company mainly develops online systems, so people are prepared to learn the keys a bit. Another point is that many users are trying to enter information and move around quickly without taking their hands off the keyboard.
Because of this, my customers have demanded the use of accesskeys. I only care about IE, and my experience with that is that if you press the alt key and release it, you get the browser menu, but if you continue to press the alt key, you get the accesskey. A subtle distinction for the occassional visitor, but fine for those willing to learn.
Because of this, I have used access keys extensively, and I don't get any user problems. You should consider whether they might address your particular situation rather than just ignoring them altogether.
_____________________________
Davids
International Relocation Technology
| |
|
|
|
davids
Posts: 211
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Belgium (American)
Status: offline
|
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/27/2005 15:33:07
Well, first I should have said my customers only care about IE - for now.
Anyway, Firefox lovers, I just tested it and it perfomes just the same way. ALT, H, brings the Help menu, Alt+H works in my menu.
The difference is that when there is an access key on a link (menu item), Firefox follows the link, while with IE, you have to press Enter. Half point to Firefox.
I can't post an example here, because there is a log in.
_____________________________
Davids
International Relocation Technology
| |
|
|
|
davids
Posts: 211
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Belgium (American)
Status: offline
|
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/27/2005 17:05:27
I bow to the greater knowledge of the Usability & Accessibility (UA) Working Group, although I fail to see why we should focus on people with internet-related disabilites that use barely heard-of browsers when there are two perfectly capable browsers out there for free.
I was not trying to get into the browser wars. What I can say is that my customers complain about a lot of things, but they NEVER complain about their browser.
All I was saying is that access keys work for me in some situations and solve a customer problem very nicely. So quite aside from principle, maybe people should keep them in their bag of tools.
_____________________________
Davids
International Relocation Technology
| |
|
|
|
Nicole
Posts: 2992
Joined: 9/15/2004
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
|
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/27/2005 17:12:21
Hi David,
Getting a bit off topic here, but a lot of people don't know what IE is, or FF, or any other. They don't even know what a browser is, all they know is that it's the "Internet". They don't complain about the "Internet" because to them why would they, the "Internet" is the thing which is working fine, it's the website or the software that making the "Internet" do funny things.
Nicole
_____________________________
". . . and God created man in his image." errr, shouldn't that be "and man created God in his image'?
| |
|
|
|
davids
Posts: 211
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Belgium (American)
Status: offline
|
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/27/2005 17:22:45
Good grief, Superwoman, access keys solve a problem for me. Can't we leave it at that?
Nicole, you're exactly right. To most users, the browser is the Internet. The fact is that they accept it as it is and are not going to look at alternatives. I have to work in their world, not try to change it to mine.
_____________________________
Davids
International Relocation Technology
| |
|
|
|
briesmith
Posts: 67
Joined: 2/6/2003
Status: offline
|
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/28/2005 5:26:36
Yes please, Jaybee, let's have the facts - and a reference? - to this £20,000 case.
All this disability access stuff is a bit like health and safety "legislation"; technofanatics, zealots, bullies, little Hitlers, bureaucrats, the lazy etc all use it to support whatever it is they do or mainly, don't, want to (have to) do.
Most disability/health & safety strictures are, like pub statistics, made up on the spot to suit an argument. No conkers in the playground, no hanging baskets, and so on.
Let's, for once, have the facts.
On the access keys issue; if you use them then then "train" your users to first press the Ctrl or Alt key and when they do, display a table of your assignments - those that are unique to your application as well as the standard ones you've not interefered with - so that they can begin to learn them.
If you don't do this you run the risk of confusion and whenever users are confused they stay away from the area generating the anxiety altogether. Which means all the work you did building your code to use access keys is wasted...
| |
|
|
|
BobbyDouglas
Posts: 5577
Joined: 5/15/2003
From: Arizona
Status: offline
|
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/28/2005 5:29:34
Some people in certain situations do not need to look at the big picture. If everyone uses IE, and you design so that your site works only in IE, but is messy in everything else, it doesn't hurt you. My site now works in Safari, Mozilla, FireFox, Opera, Netscape, and IE4/5. I have a few users that come to my site with those browsers, so I made the site to work with them. I didn't go around searching for every single browser out their, I simply know what I need to focus on, and wasting time by trying to focus on more browers would be a bad business decision.
quote:
The last case that went to court in the UK was awarded £20,000.
- If someone was awarded this money because they included accesskeys on their site, I think there is a much bigger problem here.
quote:
but a lot of people don't know what IE is, or FF, or any other. They don't even know what a browser is, all they know is that it's the "Internet". They don't complain about the "Internet" because to them why would they, the "Internet" is the thing which is working fine, it's the website or the software that making the "Internet" do funny things.
- And just about every single user that does not know, is an IE user.
quote:
So you're happy to cater for the users who are able to use IE and Firefox and completely ignore the millions who are blind or have motor disabilities and have no choice but to use other browsers such as the screen readers, Jaws, Supernova etc.
- Recrunch those numbers a bit  If there were millions of people going to his site that only works in IE/FF, then I doubt he would use something that restricts more than a million people.
_____________________________
Arizona Web Design - Mr Bobs Web Design in Arizona
The Arizona Web Hosting Challenge
| |
|
|
|
briesmith
Posts: 67
Joined: 2/6/2003
Status: offline
|
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/28/2005 6:23:03
Tailside
This is simply unachievable.
It's all very well talking about google but google only "gets away" with what it does because its display is extremely simple; just text.
There are no on-page calculations, no forms, no navigation and so on. There are no graphics; even its own ads are "boring" simple text hyperlinks.
To say that it's possible to design one, single site that operates the same with or without its CSS defies logic, and belief.
As for turning off JavaScript and getting the same results as when it's turned on, show me how. To do all application logic server side will have an enormous impact on internet loadings and page turn round times.
To achieve what Tailside suggests would mean that every web page would look like a google page; is that what we want? Is that what disability access legislation requires?
If so then clearly the legislation conflicts with the Human Rights Act, the American Constitution and so on, all of which guarantee the right of free expression.
When can we expect the Uffizi to put up a David that the blind can appreciate? Are all books, newspapers, magazines that don't include automatically and at no extra cost a Braille version together with a magnetic media version (in every format known to man) illegal?
| |
|
|
|
Tailslide
Posts: 6758
Joined: 5/10/2005
From: Out here on the raggedy edge
Status: offline
|
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/28/2005 6:31:10
quote:
ORIGINAL: briesmith
Tailside
This is simply unachievable.
It's all very well talking about google but google only "gets away" with what it does because its display is extremely simple; just text.
There are no on-page calculations, no forms, no navigation and so on. There are no graphics; even its own ads are "boring" simple text hyperlinks.
To say that it's possible to design one, single site that operates the same with or without its CSS defies logic, and belief.
As for turning off JavaScript and getting the same results as when it's turned on, show me how. To do all application logic server side will have an enormous impact on internet loadings and page turn round times.
To achieve what Tailside suggests would mean that every web page would look like a google page; is that what we want? Is that what disability access legislation requires?
If so then clearly the legislation conflicts with the Human Rights Act, the American Constitution and so on, all of which guarantee the right of free expression.
When can we expect the Uffizi to put up a David that the blind can appreciate? Are all books, newspapers, magazines that don't include automatically and at no extra cost a Braille version together with a magnetic media version (in every format known to man) illegal?
I think you've misunderstood me. I don't want every page to look like Google. What I'm saying is that when Google visits YOUR site it views your site in the same way a blind viewer would - no images, no stylesheets - just content.
As with the Javascript thing - what would cause the problem? You have Javascript do something on your page - you have a back-up in case JS is switched off which it is apparently for 10% of viewers. At least if JS is switched off the viewer shouldn't have something on their page that doesn't work for them (if you see what I mean).
There's nothing here that conflicts with the Human Rights Act or the expression of free speech - just think about what you're doing a bit when you design a site.
All the Uffizi need do is put up a sign saying "statue of naked man" - there problem solved, that was difficult!
_____________________________
Little Blue Plane Web Design | Land Rover project
| |
|
|
|
briesmith
Posts: 67
Joined: 2/6/2003
Status: offline
|
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/28/2005 6:37:04
Tailside
It won't wash I'm afraid.
Why write anything in JS if you have to do it another way as well? The only alternative to client side script is server side programming and that means more round trips as I said. OK if you've got broadband and the US is asleep, otherwise you're risking ruining the experience for the majority in order to satisfy a minority who for some reason known only to them and their maker turn JS off.
If I'm "looking" at a statue as a blind person am I really going to be happy with a cardboard notice? And what is La Scala going to do?
I notice you don't comment about CSS; what's your solution there? Tables and JavaScript?
| |
|
|
|
Nicole
Posts: 2992
Joined: 9/15/2004
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
|
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/28/2005 7:05:43
If you’re in the web design business and you choose to ignore accessibility as an issue, then you’re really playing with fire. The minute you know a possible problem may exist, you, as the web designer should set about correcting it, or at least putting an alternative in place, or you are liable whether you believe the law is right or wrong.
We’re not saying that blind people should be able to drive cars because everyone else can. Public and community transport is for that (that’s the alternative).
Accessibility is all about fixing a problem or providing alternatives.
Isn’t it like saying that only able bodied and intellect people should be allowed to walk to their corner store? Who cares if there’s no footpath, or whether it has dangerous cracks in it, or if something’s obstructing it, or whether it’s slippery when it’s raining or whether they have to cross a road to do so.
Isn’t that like the local council knowing that the footpath is in that condition but doesn’t bother fixing those problems? Or whether the local roads authority knows that there should be traffic lights there but thinks that “95% of people can see when cars are coming, that’s good enough!
Now is that a ludicrous situation? What’s more ludicrous? Fixing problems when you’re aware they exist or providing alternatives? Or believing that satisfying 95% of people is good enough?
Nicole
_____________________________
". . . and God created man in his image." errr, shouldn't that be "and man created God in his image'?
| |
|
|
|
caz
Posts: 3779
Joined: 10/10/2001
From: Somewhere south of Chester, UK
Status: offline
|
RE: Accesskeys... - 7/28/2005 7:08:41
This is the key phrase that is often misunderstood in accessibility discussions, quote:
render as readable not the same necessarily, but informative; maybe without the pretty fluff but perfectly usable for the user's purpose. Sometimes designers forget that they are designing for users, not themselves.
_____________________________
I remember when it took less than 4hrs to fly across the Atlantic.
| |
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts
|
|
|
Printable Version 
Guess I'd better check what's free and what's not. I guess no-one's told the web design textbook writers because they're all stressing you need accesskeys, even the recently written ones. 
