__/ [Alan J. Flavell] on Sunday 04 September 2005 18:54 \__
> On Sun, 4 Sep 2005, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>> I am a big fan of accesskeys,
> They were recommended by the first-issue WAI guidelines, certainly,
> but, as folks have followed those guidelines, I think the shortcomings
> of the available browsers (known only too well already to those who
> needed accessibility, I'm told) have become more widely known, to the
> extent that accesskeys have been described as "a solution in search of
> an implementation", and I know quite a few people who take an informed
> interest in accessibility who are now advising *against* providing
> them, but rather, recommending to give more thought to a logical
> design of their navigation links, so that they don't get in the way of
> accessing the content.
>> which I even use excessively. Unfortunately, there are collisions
>> involved with them. I have other accelerator collisions already (at
Very interesting, Alan.
One of my so-called "possible projects", which I have carried in my Palm for
over a year, is dynamic allocation of accesskeys (on-line or off-line),
which may enables the user to browse pages without a mouse (and without
hitting TAB a zillion times). Since letters get underlined (or anything
else that can be reflected upon in a stylesheet), link assignments can be
Roy S. Schestowitz | "Have you compiled your kernel today?"
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux | PGP-Key: 74572E8E
1:35pm up 12 days 22:55, 3 users, load average: 0.18, 0.09, 0.09