Last modified: 2012-12-21 13:58:12 UTC

Wikimedia Bugzilla is closed!

Wikimedia has migrated from Bugzilla to Phabricator. Bug reports should be created and updated in Wikimedia Phabricator instead. Please create an account in Phabricator and add your Bugzilla email address to it.
Wikimedia Bugzilla is read-only. If you try to edit or create any bug report in Bugzilla you will be shown an intentional error message.
In order to access the Phabricator task corresponding to a Bugzilla report, just remove "static-" from its URL.
You could still run searches in Bugzilla or access your list of votes but bug reports will obviously not be up-to-date in Bugzilla.
Bug 13765 - more "jump to" accessibility links needed
more "jump to" accessibility links needed
Status: REOPENED
Product: MediaWiki
Classification: Unclassified
Parser (Other open bugs)
1.21.x
All All
: Lowest enhancement (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody - You can work on this!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex-posi...
: accessibility
Depends on:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2008-04-16 15:32 UTC by Dan Jacobson
Modified: 2012-12-21 13:58 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:
Web browser: ---
Mobile Platform: ---
Assignee Huggle Beta Tester: ---


Attachments

Description Dan Jacobson 2008-04-16 15:32:12 UTC
Please consider e.g.,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex-positive_feminism

Please view it with w3m or lynx, (or Firefox without the stylesheets.)

You see this line: "Jump to: navigation, search".

Please make sure you see that line before you proceed reading this
bug. If not you are not using the right (text) browsing environment,
or are logged in without this preference.

OK. Now the problem is: "Jump to: navigation, search" is not enough.

For instance, the TOC is also a "hot" destination, hard to get to
through all the verbiage. Therefore, the line should read
"Jump to: TOC, navigation, search".

But wait, for such articles with lots up front template-wise,
"section 0" would also be a good destination for a short cut. So
"Jump to: Sec 0, TOC, navigation, search".

Should all four items always be present, or be present depending on
distance needed to reach them on a particular page?

Probably they should always be present, so they don't slip around from
page to page, making the user have to look closely before clicking.

(Perhaps now section 0 is called Lead section... or maybe call the link "content".)
Comment 1 Dan Jacobson 2008-04-18 12:56:26 UTC
And by the way, say one has pleasantly browsed one's way all the way
down to the References,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex-positive_feminism#References
and one wishes to skip the certain screen after screen of references
(well, actually not that many for this particular article) and see
what lies beyond them.

So maybe
[edit] References
should be
[edit] [skip] References
Where [skip]'s href="#name of next section".

OK, let this particular sub bug wait for: better browser features, or
the Reference Team's newer templates, instead of messing up MediaWiki
to implement it.
Comment 2 Siebrand Mazeland 2008-10-31 13:12:58 UTC
LATER per comment 1
Comment 3 Greg Ubben 2009-01-25 22:39:38 UTC
This feature as implemented is mostly useless anyway. New users (including screen reader users) will never see it since the default skin hides it via display:none. And regular users will have found the other shortcuts to reach these sections of the page.
Comment 4 Dan Jacobson 2009-01-26 21:21:43 UTC
1. Text browsers are not thrown off track by "display:none".

2. The current version has now absconded with any jump downward link
at all!

3. Therefore the only way for text browser users to get anywhere other
than the items offered in the Table of Contents, if any, is to "go
search for it with your browser's 'search string' function". Of course
one needs previous knowledge of what one is searching for.

Else one must just scroll through the whole article.
Comment 5 Dan Jacobson 2009-01-26 21:24:56 UTC
What I'm saying is for fancy browser users, all the Edit, History, Preferences, Contributions links are right there at the top of the page.

But for text browser users, its "Go dig for them, Holmes."
Comment 6 Dan Jacobson 2009-01-27 01:47:07 UTC
OK the "Jump to" link is back...
Comment 7 Dan Jacobson 2009-01-27 02:07:34 UTC
No, the Jump to link is not back.
Comment 8 Andre Klapper 2012-12-21 13:58:12 UTC
Still valid in 1.21wmf6.
[Removing RESOLVED LATER as discussed in http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2012-November/064240.html . Reopening and setting priority to "Lowest". For future reference, please use either RESOLVED WONTFIX (for issues that will not be fixed), or simply set lowest priority. Thanks a lot!]

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.


Navigation
Links