molly.com
Saturday 13 September 2003
skip the skip links & patent my patoot
Many Web designers and developers visiting my weblog are likely familiar with the concept of “skip links.” This technique is used primarily to assist with navigation for those using screen readers or those browsers without CSS support. The technique is very popular, but recent buzz has it that some screen readers do not deal well with it. Joe Clark asks that we not use skip links at all, Jon Hicks is offering some alternative solutions, and Bob Easton is providing test suites for screen readers and gathering helpful information. Bottom line? Get informed, consider skipping the skip links, look at the workarounds.
Of course, many of us in the field are wondering what the fallout will be from Eolas having won its first battle with Microsoft regarding its patent on plug-in technologies. The problems could be very far-reaching for not only Web designers and developers, but for all browsers as well as tools manufacturers. The problem is very eloquently outlined by Jeffrey Zeldman in his Daily Report, 12 September 2003. I suggest you go forth and read this if you haven’t as of yet.
What’s your take on the skip link issue? The patent folly? I hear there’s an open bar in the comment area below, so go ahead and point, click, order a cold one and opine away.
Filed under: standards
Posted by: site admin | 11:43 | Comments (13)
I have some inside information that I think may explain the Eolas situation more fully.
You see, during the trial the judge was show this website by Eolas’ attorneys. After his eyesight recovered, the judge had no choice but to put a stop to this plugin madness.
Err *shown, not show.
Oh good lord, didya have to do that to me, Dave?
Get me a crash cart, a bucket, a valium, something, please.
I’ve written to Eolas http://www.dmxzone.com/go?5546. Maybe if everyone did they’d realise there’s a PR disaster in the making?
Hi Molly,
I’m confused with the piece about skip links. Screen readers don’t have problems with them, as they’re just like any other link. As I understand it, the issue is hiding the link with CSS. Joe Clark isn’t requesting content developers avoid using skip links. He’s advocating them, and making them visible so they can be used. Has the term “Skip Link” become synonymous with providing a skip link, then hiding it? I suspect it must have, but it seems a bit confusing to me (it doesn’t take much to confuse me
).
To be honest, I’m surprised at the response from developers who have discovered that skip links may be hidden from screen readers. There seems to be an assumption that only visitors using screen readers benefit from a skip link. I’ve met quite a few people with mobility problems that would benefit from a skip link who don’t use screen readers.
Hope things are good with you.
Gez,
Great insights. I agree, I think the “skip link” concept now has an implication that the link itself is hidden. Perhaps it’s an unfortunate misnomer, but then again, many say that about the fact that people refer to markup as code.
Molly
Thanks for advertising the screen reader visibility tests!!!
A couple of weeks ago, I wrote to a number of web designers about how screen readers don’t always handle display:none as we expect. A lot has happened since then.
First, many people used my test suite and responded with results from the leading screen readers as well as a number of other interesting user agents. Yes, it is as bad as we expected. When we use display:none to hide something from visual display, we are definitely hiding it from the most used screen readers too.
Be aware, I’m not arguing with Joe Clarks’ recommendation for keeping skip links visible. Instead, I’m trying to encourage web designers who WANT to have material heard but not seen to do it in a way that actually works with today’s screen readers.
Second, several designers responded that we are coding by the standards and screen readers simply need to honor aural style sheets. I agree with those expectations. Via known contacts with screen reader developers I and others have beseeched them to pay atteniton to standards. The first screen reader that handles aural style sheets will win our support. Yet…, all of the screen reader products have their annual updates in late fall. Two of the top three definitely will not be reading aural style sheets in their next versions. Yes, we can wait for them to catch up with standards, but in the meantime our blind visitors are left without the helpful material we tried to provide for them.
The third thing that happened was development, or refinement, of a technique that does indeed work in each of the leading screen readers. It resulted from a collaboration of Choan Gálvez, Dave Shea (csszengarden) and myself. Call it what you may, but I call it “off-left,” named for the stage direction the old actor, Henry, offered Mortimer during the Abduction Ballet scene in “The Fantastiks;” “No, no, no. OFF LEFT, damn it!” It is very simple, yet allows one to place a good bit of accessibility material off-left. I am using the technique on a large corporate intranet to provide not only skip links, but also text about details of other accessibility features, lists of access keys, and (on portal pages) an index of portlets on the page.
If you are leery of waiting for the screen readers to catch up, consider updating those “hide” or “skip” styles with:
.off-left {
position:absolute;
left: -999px;
width: 900px; /* prevents long text from invading display space */
}
Best regards,
Bob Easton
Screen reader visibility results: http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=ScreenreaderVisibility
Yet…, all of the screen reader products have their annual updates in late fall. Two of the top three definitely will not be reading aural style sheets in their next versions.
yuuuu skfdsds