Accessability, need some pointers. 5

[1DMF]

I'm about to embark on the task on trying to make my sites Accessible under W3C guidelines, i've done some googling and came across some info, which not suprisingly I need help understanding.

So here goes...

1. I'm running my site through accesskeys.org and it's thrown up some warnings...

30 Mortgage Products #D9DB9C
Class: .products ul li
#2B2B2B
Class: .products
Brightness: 168
Difference: 463

48 Insurance Products #D9DB9C
Class: .products ul li
#2B2B2B
Class: .products
Brightness: 168
Difference: 463

62 Loans #D9DB9C
Class: .products ul li
#2B2B2B
Class: .products
Brightness: 168
Difference: 463

154 What People Say #D9DB9C
Class: .adverts h2
#2B2B2B
Class: .adverts
Brightness: 168
Difference: 463

156 Mr Mansbridge, Vale of Glamorgan #D9DB9C
Class: .adverts h3
#2B2B2B
Class: .adverts
Brightness: 168
Difference: 463

158 Mr Sutton, Somerset #D9DB9C
Class: .adverts h3
#2B2B2B
Class: .adverts
Brightness: 168
Difference: 463

160 Mrs Howell, West Sussex #D9DB9C
Class: .adverts h3
#2B2B2B
Class: .adverts
Brightness: 168
Difference: 463

It is saying that the difference is wrong, what does this mean and why is it an error , it's mustard yellow text on a near-black background?

is it because we are using the same colour/bg for <h1><h2><h3> etc.. and there is no difference?

Why is this an issue, why does there need to be a difference in colour with these elements.

or is this not what they mean.

2. I understand you should add "accesskey" & "tab-index" to your main links / menu , is there any 'standards' for this, i.e. 1 always = home or tab should go across the page or up and down?

Any pointers on the correct way to code and apply the accessability standards would be very much appreciated.

Regards,

1DMF

"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.

 

[monksnake]

I found this at this site 1DMF, for the first question you asked:

http://www.accesskeys.org/tools/color-contrast.html

Two colours provide good colour visibility if the brightness difference is greater then 125 and the color difference is greater then 500.

The link I posted also allows you to figure out what colors you need to given one color, evidentally, it's a side page to where you are validating your page at.







<.

 

[monksnake]

Here you go on the second question 1DMF,

The rendering of access keys depends on the user agent. We recommend that authors include the access key in label text or wherever the access key is to apply. User agents should render the value of an access key in such a way as to emphasize its role and to distinguish it from other characters (e.g., by underlining it).

Taken from this page:

http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/interact/forms.html#h-17.11.2

<.

 

[1DMF]

so if I have a menu made up of anchors, are they saying I need to make the title of those anchors contain the access key for that menu option?

E.G.

<a href="index.html" title="Home Page (AccessKey 0)">home</a>

as they say 'label' but i'm assuming they don't mean the tag label ? or do they , isn't that just for forms / input elements?

In the example for an anchor they don't even use the title attribute, and what does 'rel' mean? it doesn't give much info just rel="contents" , is 'rel' to do with accessability?

I've only ever used it for a CSS link tag!

The colours thing is a bit tricky, those are the colours I've been asked to use, it's like saying to a company they have to re-brand their corporate image to meet cetain colour schemes, that I can assure you is not going to happen.

whre will it end, does that mean you can no longer use red or green , because some are red/green colour blind.

I have a mate who is red green colour blind and also has trouble with shades, especially brown/burgandy/mauve/purple.

if I wrote a site just for him, it would be two tone! (black and white), not really ideal.

Imaging every website on the internet was black and white , just to cater for those with varying colour blindness, what a dull and boring place the net would be!

As the saying goes, 'you can please all the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time, but you cannot please all the people all of the time'

I take it there is no 'standard' way of coding tab-index ?

And does every element require an accesskey? so every input field, every button, evey link, every clickable image etc?





"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.

 

[johnwm]

Accessibility for the colour blind can be readily assessed here

http://colorfilter.wickline.org/

___________________________________________________________
If you want the best response to a question, please check out FAQ222-2244 first.
'If we're supposed to work in Hex, why have we only got A fingers?'
Drive a Steam Roller
Steam Engine Prints

 

[feherke]

Hi

I think they are talking about this [tt]link[/tt]s :

http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/types.html#type-links

Because yes, they improve the accessibility.

Feherke.

http://rootshell.be/~feherke/

 

[monksnake]

I believe they mean include it amongst the letters or numbers of the label (anchor text), like so. Try to use a letter or number that would appear naturally in the anchor text then highlight it somehow to make it stand apart from the rest of the text. I don't think it means to actually write out something to the effect of (accesskey 0), though you may want to put somewhere in your page that emphasized text (however you do it) is the access key for that anchor, texbox, etc.

<a accesskey="H" href="index.html" title="Home Page">[u]H[/u]ome</a>

<.

 

[1DMF]

thanks johnwm, is the resulting page what people with that affliction see, if so the site displays fine. I'm not sure what I'm meant to be looking for.

Do you beleive what I see is a true representation of what they would see, as I am full sighted looking at a monochrome image, which surely is not the same as someone with total colour blindness looking at a monochrome image.

I guess I'll get my mate who is colour blind to tell me what they see and if anything needs changing.







"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.

 

[1DMF]

cheers monksnake, makes more sense, though whether the powers at be will like the site with all this emphasis on letters , which they may see as detracting from the design, I guess I'll have to try it and see what they say.

feherke -> you've lost me , do you mean rel="contents" , so rel is used to describe the type of link, is that what you mean?

so rel="contents" means this link takes you to a page which contains a contents (which would be a page full of more links i take it?)

"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.

 

[feherke]

Hi

Try Mark Pilgrim's article, he explains better the [tt]link[/tt] tags :

http://diveintoaccessibility.org/day_9_providing_additional_navigation_aids.html

Feherke.

http://rootshell.be/~feherke/

 

[1DMF]

thanks guys

"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.

 

[1DMF]

sorry if i'm being a bit thick, ok alot thick , no change there then!

but how would you underline/emphasise the accesskey.

obviuosly <u> is deprecated along with <b> , <em> I don't think would be a good choice nor <strong>...

So would the semantic way to wrap the first letter in a <span> tag and apply a class to it and then use CSS to style the class?

Seems like alot of work to put a little line under one character, but if this is the correct way to do it , it will be done.

thanks 1DMF

"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.

 

[feherke]

Hi

obviuosly <u> is deprecated along with <b>

Only [tt]u[/tt] is deprecated. [tt]b[/tt] and [tt]i[/tt] are permitted even in current recommendation XHTML 1.1. For example this validates :

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN" "[URL unfurl="true"]http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd">[/URL]
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"/>
<title></title>
</head>
<body>
<p>[red]<b>[/red]H[red]</b>[/red]ot[red]<i>[/red]K[red]</i>[/red]ey</p>
</body>
</html>

To me [tt]span[/tt] seems to be the way. Honestly, I do not really like it.

Feherke.

http://rootshell.be/~feherke/

 

[1DMF]

I could have sworn I read that <b> & <i> are deprecated, infact I'm sure it was <b> has been replaced with <strong> and <em> basically does the same visually as <i> , though if a screen reader understood <i> would it emphasis the word as <em> makes it?

But I hear you, my thoughts also, <span class="myclass">H</span> and then defining the CSS class seems way OTT for what i'm trying to acheive.

I thought the standards were bassed on the K.I.S.S. principle, but hey , i've said it before and i'll say it again, i will never fully understand the standards!

These days I give up trying to understand them, I just do my best to follow them, regardless of my oppinion of them!

I can't beat em, so I might as well join em!

"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.

 

[ChrisHunt]

Before you spend too much time implementing access keys on your site, give some consideration to the possibility that they could do more harm than good. See this article for what I'm talking about -

http://www.wats.ca/show.php?contentid=32

In short, there are lots of keyboard shortcuts that people use to access features of their browsers - and overwriting them with your own shortcuts for your particular site could make life harder for them instead of easier.

There's a really thorough exploration of the issues around accesskeys at

http://webaim.org/techniques/keyboard/accesskey.php

.

-- Chris Hunt
Webmaster & Tragedian
Extra Connections Ltd

 

[feherke]

Hi

there are lots of keyboard shortcuts that people use to access features of their browsers

Correct. This is why the UK Government accesskeys standard recommendation is based mostly on numbers. And this is why in FireFox since 2.0.0 the accesskeys are activated with Alt-Shift-key.

Personally I will keep implementing them. They were designed to be helpful and I believe some day will be, without any issue. But if in meantime webmasters will keep ignoring/removing them, they will be forgot.

Anyway, thank you for the URLs of the articles, will read them.

Feherke.

http://rootshell.be/~feherke/

 

[1DMF]

I've been sent this article by the missus (yep she's in IT also, who isn't!)

http://www.out-law.com/page-330

Although my employer does not beleive there is accessability legislation, obviously there is, and as we are in the Financial Services industry, regulated by the Financial Services Authority, I would have thought it was our obligation to meet all government legislation.

This is why i'm trying to do my best to implement these changes.

I'm concerned by your comment that implementing them could do more harm than good, and see that Canada government now recommends NOT to use accesskeys.

Talk about catch 22!

So what do I do?

Should I implement access keys just for the main navigation? and not litter the form with an access key for every label , input field and kitchen sink?

If implementing them affects the "other technology" , is this actualy making it harder to navigate, rather than easier and thus defeating the point of trying to make your site more accessible and also therefore means using them actually breaches accessability law.

Man this is a mine field, what would you guys do?



"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.

 

[monksnake]

I think you're looking too deep into this, I'd just ask your employer what he/she wants and just do that. You may have to explain accessibility laws to them first. That way, if you do break the law, it's his/her fault and you only did what you were told.



<.

 

[1DMF]

hmmm, yeah I know i could do that, hey let's all pass the buck!

I wan't my work to be the best I can, I take pride in my work and tend to go the extra mile, hell I've forgotten how many hours unpaid overtime i've done working on a website till sily o'clock of the morning, because I won't be beat!

What's funny is when I made a flipant comment regarding who cares about accessability I got slammed.

Now I'm taking it seriously , I'm being told to not bother, you just can't win!

"In complete darkness we are all the same, only our knowledge and wisdom separates us, don't let your eyes deceive you.

 

[ChrisHunt]

We're not lawyers here, and we don't know which country's law you're trying to comply with, but I'd look at it like this:

Accessibility laws (broadly) state that people with various disabilities should be able to access your site (be it a physical site or a web site).

The important question in this particular context is "is it possible to navigate this site using only a keyboard?" If the answer to this question is "yes", you should be on the right side of the law. Providing accesskeys will make it easier for some people to use the site, but maybe more difficult for others - it's a judgement call.

If you decide to go with them, I'd agree with feherke and suggest using the UK Government list (especially since, if you're covered by the FSA, you're presumably in the UK). Using the same standard as the lawmakers use themselves sounds like a pretty good legal defence to me!

-- Chris Hunt
Webmaster & Tragedian
Extra Connections Ltd