(In reply to Wayne Mery (:wsmwk) from comment #8) > should we just dupe this to one of those refined solutions? Well, while things got much better, the key problem remains: We still have large/unlimited number of tab stops for all recipients in the main sequence. We should eventually address this per my suggestion of comment 7: > In the long run, I propose to shorten the <tab> sequence even further > - use <tab> to move focus fast track between From, Subject, To, Date... > - within header fields that contain a list of contacts (like To, CC, BCC), > use <cursor> keys to move focus from one contact to another For which I've just filed this as a followup: Bug 1799714 - Message header can have unlimited number of tab stops in recipient fields (To, CC, Bcc), which may seriously impede keyboard navigation (should follow ARIA grid pattern standards) So we can close this bug as wfm on 102.4.2 (64-bit) per current summary.
Bug 458635 Comment 9 Edit History
Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.
(In reply to Wayne Mery (:wsmwk) from comment #8) > should we just dupe this to one of those refined solutions? Well, while things got much better, the key problem remains: We still have large/unlimited number of tab stops for all recipients in the main sequence. We should eventually address this per my suggestion of comment 7: > In the long run, I propose to shorten the <tab> sequence even further > - use <tab> to move focus fast track between From, Subject, To, Date... > - within header fields that contain a list of contacts (like To, CC, BCC), > use <cursor> keys to move focus from one contact to another For which I've just filed a followup: Bug 1799714 - Message header can have unlimited number of tab stops in recipient fields (To, CC, Bcc), which may seriously impede keyboard navigation (should follow ARIA grid pattern standards) So we can close this bug as wfm on 102.4.2 (64-bit) per current summary.