It may come as a surprise but it’s true. Web Content Accessibility Guidelines have a level A success criteria “2.4.1 Bypass Blocks” (opens in new window) that seems to be quite simple at first: “A mechanism is available to bypass blocks of content that are repeated on multiple Web pages”. By mechanism they mean process or technique for achieving a result and it may be provided by either platform, user agent (for example browser) and assistive technology (for example screen-reader).
So far so good, but does this mean all pages must have a “Skip to content” or “Skip to main content” link as the first link in the document flow? Not according to WCAG. If you open the understanding bypass blocks document you can find sufficient techniques that are split into two (opens in new window);
- Creating links to skip blocks of repeated material (for example link at the top of each page / before repeated content that goes to main content / end of the block).
- Grouping blocks of repeated material in a way that can be skipped (for example using ARIA landmarks for regions, providing headings at the beginning of sections, even expandable and collapsible menus).
Conformance to WCAG is a start but we can do better. This is one of the simple examples why
So if you only use headings at the start of each section of content you are conforming to WCAG success criteria 2.4.1. Does this mean your site is accessible. Well, I believe that there is room for improvement. Screen-reader users can navigate the page by regions and headings, so they will not benefit a lot from a link on the top. They may actually not even know the link is there as they most often just use the shortcuts to start in main landmark or maybe even with first heading on the page. If they remember the sites structure from before and do not need to research the main navigation for example.
Users that use touch devices and users that use mouse will also not benefit from this link to skip to main content. They can just scroll to the content they want.
Who will then benefit from the infamous “Skip to content” link? All the sighted keyboard only users will appreciate it a lot. Even on known pages, yes. Imagine yourself visiting your favorite news page. But this time – imagine using keyboard only. How will you move through the articles? One possibility is with arrow keys, not very useful but possible. The better way to do it is by using tab key. If page is coded correctly this will take you from top to bottom of the page, stopping on all interactive elements, like links and buttons. And now imagine that the news site starts with a huge navigation, as it is quite often with news sites. There can be dozens or even hundreds of links in the navigation alone. And if you want to get to the content you will have to press the tab key for each and every one of them. If site is using ARIA regions (semantic HTML) and headings it will not help you. The “skip to content” link before navigation would help you much more. Maybe not the first time you visit the page. Then it could be useful to understand what is in the navigation.
Majority of websites will benefit from skip to content link
If page has two items in the navigation then I guess it is maybe not so useful with a skip to content link. Where do we set the limit? I would guess 4 items or more. Saving 4 tab key presses for some users and not causing any problems for other users is making the web a bit more accessible in my book. This skip to content link can be visually hidden and only visible on focus. That way it can even not be there for people that do not use the keyboard.
Majority of pages go beyond 4 items in the navigation before content, so I think that it would be improving usability for people benefiting from it way more than it would hurt the designers that may oppose it. And developers time for such a link should really not be a problem compared to benefit for end users. This kind of link will most probably be a part of main template, so implementing it would not need multiple updates on multiple files.
It’s not required for WCAG conformance but it may literally hurt your users
Some users can not use mouse or even swipe down and up to scroll on their mobile devices. They may be in pain for even using the computer keyboard. So making their user experience simpler, with less key presses, will literally make them less in pain. This is the ultimate benefit from a single link. Can you imagine that? This is what I like to think when thinking of benefits of accessibility.
