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

["Jim Thatcher" <jim@jimthatcher.com>]

Hi again, Larry.

I think your verbosity is good and your points are clear. I agree with all
your observations including the crucial one.

> 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. 

There is nothing in the 508 Web Accessibility Standards that requires
adherence to WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 13.1 - Clearly identify the target of each
link. The fact that that checkpoint is priority 2 may have something to do
with it not appearing in the 509 Standards.

Jim
 
Accessibility Consulting: http://jimthatcher.com/
512-306-0931

-----Original Message-----
From: lghull@aol.com [mailto:lghull@aol.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2005 12:06 PM
To: jim@jimthatcher.com; sec508@trace.wisc.edu
Subject: Re: [SEC508] "New" use of title attribite for a link

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