Comments on: Self-Referential Links: Controversy Rumbles On http://www.thepickards.co.uk/index.php/200608/self-referential-links-controversy-rumbles-on/ ranting and rambling to anyone willing to listen Mon, 31 May 2010 22:47:34 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: AlastairC http://www.thepickards.co.uk/index.php/200608/self-referential-links-controversy-rumbles-on/comment-page-1/#comment-294 AlastairC Thu, 12 Oct 2006 13:46:05 +0000 http://www.thepickards.co.uk/index.php/200608/self-referential-links-controversy-rumbles-on/#comment-294 Hmm, lots of stuff to comment on there: "We don’t believe that accessibility and usability are the same thing." Without getting into semantics, I would suggest that accessibility is a particular niche of usability, which is fairly clear from the standard definition of usability. The main difference is that accessibility is mandated with legal requirements. "we want to be sure that issues that are recorded are due to the inaccessibility of the site and not because the tester doesn’t know how to use their software properly." as any experienced facilitator will be able to do. "we choose to work regularly with a core team with a broad spectrum of disabilities." See: http://alastairc.ac/2006/07/expert-usability-participants/ "a method where the level of expertise of the user and his/her assistive technology is unknown." These aspects are known, checked and accounted for. It is unlikely that you would notice self-referential links as an issue without observing typical users. "It is the styling of the link that is the important factor and there are many other more effective ways of offering strong indicators of the current page in the menu system." How would that styling be apparent to someone using a screen reader? Also, when using a screen magnifier and the link is not near any page information headings, as is often the case. What better way is there to indicate that it is the current page than with styling <strong>and</strong> structure? Hmm, lots of stuff to comment on there:

“We don’t believe that accessibility and usability are the same thing.”

Without getting into semantics, I would suggest that accessibility is a particular niche of usability, which is fairly clear from the standard definition of usability. The main difference is that accessibility is mandated with legal requirements.

“we want to be sure that issues that are recorded are due to the inaccessibility of the site and not because the tester doesn’t know how to use their software properly.” as any experienced facilitator will be able to do.

“we choose to work regularly with a core team with a broad spectrum of disabilities.” See:
http://alastairc.ac/2006/07/expert-usability-participants/

“a method where the level of expertise of the user and his/her assistive technology is unknown.” These aspects are known, checked and accounted for.

It is unlikely that you would notice self-referential links as an issue without observing typical users.

“It is the styling of the link that is the important factor and there are many other more effective ways of offering strong indicators of the current page in the menu system.”
How would that styling be apparent to someone using a screen reader? Also, when using a screen magnifier and the link is not near any page information headings, as is often the case.

What better way is there to indicate that it is the current page than with styling and structure?

]]> By: Grant Broome http://www.thepickards.co.uk/index.php/200608/self-referential-links-controversy-rumbles-on/comment-page-1/#comment-62 Grant Broome Tue, 22 Aug 2006 09:19:10 +0000 http://www.thepickards.co.uk/index.php/200608/self-referential-links-controversy-rumbles-on/#comment-62 At Shaw Trust the testing method is quite different from that at Nomensa. We don't believe that accessibilty and usability are the same thing. To be able to accredit a website, we want to be sure that issues that are recorded are due to the innaccessibilty of the site and not because the tester doesn't know how to use their software properly. This is why we choose to work regularly with a core team with a broad spectrum of disabilities. We feel that this method has many advantages over a method where the level of expertise of the user and his/her assistive technology is unknown. From your comment I would summise that the issue you have observed is not because the page is self referential, but that it is not clear to the user which page they are currently on or that the link that they are trying to activate is the current page. I do not accept that the best way to indicate the current page is to remove the self-link. It is the styling of the link that is the important factor and there are many other more effective ways of offering strong indicators of the current page in the menu system. At Shaw Trust the testing method is quite different from that at Nomensa.
We don’t believe that accessibilty and usability are the same thing.
To be able to accredit a website, we want to be sure that issues that are recorded are due to the innaccessibilty of the site and not because the tester doesn’t know how to use their software properly. This is why we choose to work regularly with a core team with a broad spectrum of disabilities. We feel that this method has many advantages over a method where the level of expertise of the user and his/her assistive technology is unknown.

From your comment I would summise that the issue you have observed is not because the page is self referential, but that it is not clear to the user which page they are currently on or that the link that they are trying to activate is the current page. I do not accept that the best way to indicate the current page is to remove the self-link. It is the styling of the link that is the important factor and there are many other more effective ways of offering strong indicators of the current page in the menu system.

]]> By: AlastairC http://www.thepickards.co.uk/index.php/200608/self-referential-links-controversy-rumbles-on/comment-page-1/#comment-61 AlastairC Mon, 21 Aug 2006 20:31:26 +0000 http://www.thepickards.co.uk/index.php/200608/self-referential-links-controversy-rumbles-on/#comment-61 Hi Jack, Does the Shaw trust observe people during the sessions or are the results <a href="http://alastairc.ac/2006/07/expert-usability-participants/" rel="nofollow">self reported</a>? I've seen it cause problems (as I mentioned on accessify), where (non-disabled) people have repeatedly clicked the self-referential links, and it is worse for people using screen magnifiers. Not linking to the current page is a navigational indicator in itself, and with styling, quite a strong <strong>and</strong> functional indicator. Hi Jack,

Does the Shaw trust observe people during the sessions or are the results self reported?

I’ve seen it cause problems (as I mentioned on accessify), where (non-disabled) people have repeatedly clicked the self-referential links, and it is worse for people using screen magnifiers.

Not linking to the current page is a navigational indicator in itself, and with styling, quite a strong and functional indicator.

]]>