|
Actually, the site I read said the link should read "Skip to the main content."
Whole thing.
Because otherwise (from what I understood) if it isnt' written out that way, the screen reader pronounces content wrong. It pronounces it like the verb... the dog was content.
And neither link would nessicarily have to show up on your finished page if you style them with display:none;. It would be there for the sole purpose of users with screen readers.
I would use:
Skip to the main content.
Skip to the navigation menu.
-------Original Message-------
Date: 06/23/05 20:22:31
Subject: Re: [WSG] Page structure - navigation
The technique is called reverse source order, and yes in theory it does
improve your ranking in SERP's because content laden words appear at
the top of the page. It also means the first screenful in a text only
browser is content.
I've been using this technique for over two years now, and if you
position your navigation with CSS nobody can tell the difference.
You don't need skip links, but you can code them in if you want, drop
the "skip to" because it doesn't really make sense and add menu, as it
is slightly more universally understood than navigation:
* Main Content
* Navigation Menu
regards
Terrence Wood.
On 24 Jun 2005, at 11:56 AM, Darren Wood wrote:
> indeed.
>
> if i used a screen reader I'd rather see:
> * Skip To Main Content
> * Skip To Navigation
******************************************************
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
******************************************************
| 