Recommendation for Shortcuts

There is no overall consistency in terms of which shortcuts are used for which links and functions across sites. These 'standards' are repeatedly discussed amongst experts and there is general consensus amongst experts only in that the concept of shortcuts on websites has not yet been fully worked through.

Below is a recommendation for the reservation of shortcuts that focuses on the implementation of a standardised reference chart and the visibility of shortcuts in the browser.

Using shortcuts in the Internet

Using the Internet with the keyboard is relatively limited. Generally, there are only two ways of navigating through a website using the keyboard:

1. Navigation using the Tab key
2. Navigation using shortcuts

The usage of the Tab key on pages with many links may not be profitable, as 'tabbing' activates each and every link. A further aspect of this kind of navigation is its linearity: links, form elements as well as image maps are generally accessed in the sequence they appear in the source code.

Offering shortcuts to directly access links and functions entails problems of a different kind. We have already mentioned the lack of consensus in reserving the keys. Also, the different concepts of using the keyboard in different browsers provide a challenging task for web designers.

Nearly all of the currently available graphic browsers omit to provide the user with available shortcuts on the website, even if AccessKey is supported by the browser. The W3C recommends displaying the letters which act as shortcuts on the browser, e.g. underlined letters for shortcuts on Window applications or display of letters next to the link with MacOS. At present, the web designer needs to inform the user which shortcuts can bring up which links.

The browser OmniWeb for MacOS takes an entirely different approach: in this browser, shortcuts for links are not necessarily required, because pressing a letter, for instance an 'a', places the system focus directly on the first link that begins with 'a'. By pressing 'a' again after a short period of time, the second link that begins with 'a' is accessed.

Standardised shortcuts

Even if the set of reserved keys are displayed on the browser, the problem of the 'standardised' definition of keys remains. It's a matter of providing the user with several shortcuts, which he can use not just on one, but consistently on a great number of websites.

Due to the lack of consensus on the definitions of keys on websites, different content providers can define, for example, the link "Home" with a variety of shortcuts:

• "H" (because the word begins with H)
• "M" (because H is used elsewhere, e.g. "Help")
• "S" (because the label "Start", instead of "Home", is used)
• "1" (because the link leads to the Homepage)
• "0" (because the link leads to the Homepage ... )

Of course, every website provider can create a list of own shortcuts and a regular visitor who uses shortcuts, will soon know them well. But this is profitable for the one website only.

It is, however, a lot to ask visitors who are dependant on shortcuts to memorise them for every new page. The web provider should instead seek to abide to standard recommendations if it offers shortcuts and not develop own reference charts.

Shortcuts using letters

There is a general problem when using letters as shortcuts: calling up links to a website usually requires the same key as the shortcuts of the browser itself. On Window systems, for example, this is the Alt key. As the browser (here, too: according to operating system) partly uses its own shortcuts in connection with the Alt key it becomes very difficult to create an overall 'norm' for browsers. Here a list of reserved keys, which are called up with Alt (Windows 98):

Theoretically only c, j and t (and without Lynx o and q) remain. Only possibly in an Intranet environment can certain regularities of the used browsers be relied on and specific shortcuts be defined. The same does not hold on the Web.

And if multilingualism plays a role on your website, the problem becomes even more complex.

Shortcuts using numbers

The numbers 0 to 9 also work on the alphanumeric block on the keyboard, though. In most of the browsers there is no conflict with these shortcuts, though there are exceptions here as well. The window tabs of Firefox on Linux systems, for example, are activated with the key combination Alt and one of the numbers. The numbers 0 to 9 are therefore not ideal for applying to a reference chart, but bring far fewer conflicts with them. You will find a table with a list of reserved keystrokes under http://www.wats.ca/show.php?contentid=43.

A useful way of reserving shortcuts

Only the numbers 0 to 9 are to greater or lesser extent practical for using AccessKeys to make websites as browser-independent as possible and also to face the problem of different languages.

As the ten numbers at one's disposal will probably not be enough to allocate every link with an AccessKey, the most important pages of the website should be established, so as to target them specifically via the available shortcuts.

Main emphasis is placed on the navigation of a website. Important pages should be able to be loaded at any time. Navigation within a single webpage is not advisable. The effective usability of a page is in part reached through standard compliance and thereby accompanying compliance to WCAG.

The reservation of shortcuts could look as follows:

Important pages:

For search and orientation:

This leaves key 9 for establishing contact:

The alternative

Inherently, the concept of shortcuts is not adequate for the Web. There are too few possibilities for reserving keys and a useful adoption requires standardisation.

(X)HTML offers possibilities of inclusion of relations which can be integrated in the header section and which need to be displayed by a browser. Unfortunately, this does not work yet in Internet Explorer.

The advantage of the LINK relations would be that access - also key access - to the linked pages would be possible via the browser. There would be standardised options for access which could be adjusted via the user and the browser.

AccessKey-Pad

So the aforementioned suggested shortcuts serve as a substitute for the navigation help that LINK element offers which, according to specification are supposed to be provided for, but which not all browser manufacturers implement.

It seems obvious that the use of a set allocation of keys needs to be documented in some form. What helps though when using shortcuts is a visualisation of the reserved keys. Provided that the above-mentioned suggestion with numbers as shortcuts is implemented, using the AccessKey-Pad is an appropriate option.

A comprehensive keypad navigation within most websites is then possible, which mouse users also stand to benefit from.