Sent by Joe Clark on 12 September 2003 04:04
>Well, if hiding a link by coloring the text the same as the=
>background keeps you out, then we can't use this technique= either.
>This is not a sarcastic remark, it is an acknowledgement= that
>although this technique may be "visible" to screen readers,= it is
>invisible to the sighted who may wish to use it. I am= surprised
>that you did not take a stronger stance and say, "No,= I can't use
>it". However, your small text technique does not= comply with Joe
>Clark's recommendation (according to another on= this list) which
>was to suggest large text.
>From: Curtis Clark
>
>If I remember correctly (the text of the book is on the web, at
>joeclark.org), the idea is that it should be large enough that you
>notice it and can tell when you've tabbed to it, which IMO would
>rule out 8px text, or #eeeeee on white, but perhaps not text that
>would be annoyingly small if you had to read a paragraph of it.
The actual recommendations:
<http://joeclark.org/book/sashay/serialization/Chapter08.html#h4-2020>
Yes, skip-navigation links should be visible. They don't have to be
big. You could, if necessary, use an icon, but I wouldn't.
>From: Bob Easton [EMAIL-REMOVED]>
>
>So could access keys, and many accessibility experts recommend using
>them. However, Joe is not too keen about them (pp164-172). Even
>though he characterizes using accesskeys as "building for a future
>utopia," they are becoming more popular and there is even a
>convention arising.
<http://joeclark.org/book/sashay/serialization/Chapter08.html#h4-5205>
--
Joe Clark | [EMAIL-REMOVED]
Accessibility <http://joeclark.org/access/>
Expect criticism if you top-post
______________________________________________________________________
css-discuss [EMAIL-REMOVED]]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/