Re: [SEC508] "New" use of title attribite for a link

[lghull@aol.com]

Jim,

 I'm aware that the image example should an alt attribute in the image 
tag.

 I said in my original message, 'the Access Board has recommended 
authors also use the "alt" attribute in the enclosed image.'

 A friend let me know of the JAWS options that you cover nicely and of 
the problems when the title option is not selected or the links are 
read out of context. My difficulty is how to convince designers that 
these are real problems for some people. More specifically...

 I'm seeing instances like your hotel example or my "view site" example 
on Federal agency sites that claim to be Section 508 compliant.

 I can't find any comment by the Access Board that deals with other 
than the image example that I provided. References to that example are 
shrugged off on two grounds: (1) the text in these "new" cases is read, 
not buried in an image (i.e., a different case) and (2) the associated 
text as well as the title attribute supplies all necessary information 
to interpret the "view site" link.

 I should add that the problem is not necessarily limited to screen 
reader users surfing without the title option turned on or using a link 
list. I'm told by people using magnification technology that they have 
difficulty reading most tool tips and I believe people with fine motor 
disabilities could have difficulty hovering over the link long enough 
to trigger the tool tip.

 Usability, accessibility, and good practice arguments are good but 
unfortunately don't seem to have the impact of Section 508 when it 
comes to Federal agencies and to other organizations (e.g., Federally 
funded) that are required to follow Access Board rules.

 By the way, today I discovered a secondary reason not to use 
non-specific text links. My insurance company issues a bimonthly 
newsletter with brief introductory paragraphs followed by links to 
"more information". The December newsletter has three new paragraphs. 
The first "more information" link does provide more on the specified 
topic. The second and third "more information" links go to the topics 
covered in the October newsletter. The non-specific text links hide the 
fact that only one of the three was updated.

Sorry for being so verbose but I'm feeling a little frustrated.

Larry

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Thatcher <jim@jimthatcher.com>
To: LGHull@aol.com; sec508@trace.wisc.edu
Sent: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 19:47:17 -0600
Subject: RE: [SEC508] "New" use of title attribite for a link

Hi Larry,

> I?m well aware of the use of the "title" attribute in the <a> tag to
> include a meaningful description as in the following example.
> <a title="this link starts myFunction"
> href="javascript:myFunction();"><img src="myFunction.gif"></a>

 There is a problem with your example. The <img> element must have the 
alt
attribute like this:
<a href="javascript:myFunction();">
<img src="myFunction.gif" alt="start myFunction"></a>

 The alt is required on the <img> tag and should say what the function 
is,
 not in a declarative sentence, but just the function. So when a 
question
 mark icon opens a help document, the alt text should be "help", not 
"link to
help" or "this opens help document".

 Then on the title attribute; best practice here is dictated in part by 
the
 way screen readers work. JAWS in particular has a setting to read 
either the
 title text, the link text (in this case that would be the alt-text), 
or the
 longer of the two. So when you do use the title on an anchor, make 
sure it
 includes all the information, because both link text and alt-text will 
not
be announced.

 When the title attribute is used to provide more information about 
something
 where link text is short like on a travel site there are dozens of 
hotels
listed on a page, with their nightly rates, and for each a link "hotel
 details". The information is inadequate when the link is read out of 
context
 (like in a links list), so each of these anchors should have a title 
like
"Marriott Orlando details".

Jim

Accessibility Consulting: http://jimthatcher.com/
512-306-0931
-----Original Message-----
 From: sec508-admin@trace.wisc.edu [mailto:sec508-admin@trace.wisc.edu] 
On
Behalf Of LGHull@aol.com
Sent: Monday, December 26, 2005 10:32 AM
To: sec508@trace.wisc.edu
Subject: [SEC508] "New" use of title attribite for a link

 I'm well aware of the use of the "title" attribute in the <a> tag to 
include
a meaningful description as in the following example.
 <a title="this link starts myFunction" 
href="javascript:myFunction();"><img
src="myFunction.gif"></a>
 As this tag is supported by some but not all assistive technologies, 
the
 Access Board has recommended authors also use the "alt" attribute in 
the
enclosed image.
 Now I'm starting to see instances where the title attribute is used 
with the
 repetitive appearance of the same text, not an image, used as a link 
as in
the following example.
 <a title="text description or name of a site" href="go_to_some_page"> 
+ view
site </a>
In short, the differing title attribute text is all that distinguishes
several of these "view site" links.
 Admittedly there is text associated with these repetitious text links 
that
also provides the name and/or a description of the site.
 However, to me this is just the old "click here" problem with the 
addition
of a title attribute.
It works if (1) the assistive technology supports title, perhaps as an
option, and (2) the option to read title is turned on.
Has the Access Board considered this usage?
Should this usage be considered Section 508 compliant?
Regards,
Larry Hull




_______________________________________________
SEC508 mailing list
SEC508@trace.wisc.edu
http://trace.wisc.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/sec508