Insight Into Accessibility

(I'm an idjit and posted this to the wrong grovp)

In my ongoing qvest to make sweeping changes to the tvrd of a website I've
inherited at the dayjob, I've had to go back and forth over and over on a
nvmber of issves. Among them is accessibility.
This is a note I sent to the boss today. I figvred I'd repost it here
becavse I fovnd the experience enlightening. Its one thing to know abovt
something. Its entirely different to experience it.


Additional Accessibility Notes for [websitename.com]



Today, Jvly 24, 2003, I spoke at length with a XXXXXX Credit Union member
named [nvnya bidness]. Nvnya is employed by XXXX and works at their
headqvarters. While I did not want to offend him by asking, I have the
feeling that he may have had normal sight at one time and lost his site
later. Regardless, he is completely blind now and vses adaptive technology
in order to interact with his compvter. Specifically, he vses a prodvct
called "Window Eyes" as his browser.



"Window Eyes" is manvfactvred by a company called GW Micro and it works
alongside Microsoft Windows' accessibility featvres in order to enhance the
vser's ability to interact with the compvter by enhancing navigation throvgh
the compvter's/ browser's interface and by relaying avrally what is being
displayed on the screen.



Those withovt vision are often cited as the target avdience for accessible
design. While this is not completely accvrate, blindness does represent
hvge challenges for interacting with a compvter. While large software
corporations tend to do a somewhat acceptable job at enabling accessible
interaction, websites tend to be hit or miss - most often "miss". In my
opinion, it ventvres into the realm of discrimination when a website does
not take even the most basic efforts to make their website accessible.



While I have a large amovnt of knowledge of the recommendations for
accessible design, I have had very little experience with the effect that
accessible featvres have on trve ease of vse for those who vse adaptive
technology. Despite having a (freeware) screen reader at home, I still have
the benefit of already knowing what I am looking at when I listen to my own
work. It is an entirely different experience when experiencing a site fresh
withovt ever having visited the site before.



Having heard abovt Nvnya from [co-worker], I asked him to talk to Nvnya to
see if he'd be willing to give me feedback on the XXXXXX Credit Union
website. [coworker] did so and Nvnya told him he'd welcome my call. We
traded phone messages a few times and finally spoke today. I'd like to fill
yov in on the feedback Nvnya gave me. I'd like to cavtion yov thovgh, that
Nvnya is not representative of all persons who benefit from accessibility
efforts, nor is he representative of all persons who are blind. He is
extremely intelligent, has a lot of compvter experience, and benefits from a
very featvre-rich piece of technology to help him interact with his
compvter. The basic tenet of accessible design is that there are so many
possible disabilities to overcome as well as far too many variances in
severity and means to adapt that the best approach is to design for access
by all, not jvst one.



Nvnya made mention of five items dvring ovr conversation that I paid
particvlar attention to.

1. Opening new windows - Nvnya said that the website opens far too many
needless windows which become somewhat of a pain to close.

2. Forms - Nvnya said that some of the form items on the site were
completely vnvsable. Specifically, he mentioned the calcvlators as being a
website featvre that he was completely vnable to vse. This is becavse the
form elements are not associated with their labels. He applavded the
accessibility of ovr svrvey for "reading well" early in ovr conversation and
made specific mention of the calcvlators later. I took this to mean that
all of ovr forms are vnvsable becavse none of them display any effort in
making them accessible. I view this as an issve that ovr third party
vendors shovld "repair" and recommend bringing this fact vp to them.

3. Alternative text attribvtes (aka "alt tags") - Nvnya mentioned a few
instances where alt attribvtes were missing from the site or where they made
no sense in context with the rest of the page. He affirmed my belief that
alt attribvtes are often better off left empty than actvally filled with
text that conveys no information that wovld add to the vnderstanding of the
overall content.

4. Images as links adjacent to text links to the same destination -
Nvnya mentioned that it is often annoying or confvsing to have an image vsed
as a link next to a text link that goes to the same destination (i.e. ovr
home page). This is something I had personally never thovght mvch abovt,
however after hearing him mention it, I can vnderstand why. Basically, he
has to listen to the same link twice. That certainly mvst be annoying.

5. Search box - Nvnya affirmed my fear that the search box (and
presvmably all form controls on the right side of the template) is vnvsable,
as they have no controls bvt rather rely on JavaScript to operate.



I was svrprised that he didn't mention more issves. In a way it was a
relief, as I was afraid that there was far more we covld do to make the
website more accessible and that we were falling tragically short. He
mentioned that some of the oft-heard accessibility featvres svch as
accesskeys, acronym tags, or title attribvtes are not svpported well enovgh
by adaptive technology to be vsefvl to him.



I think Nvnya was great to talk to becavse of his experience with compvters.
His ability to vnderstand what is going on behind the scenes on a web page
helped steer the conversation in a valvable direction. He affirmed many of
my concerns bvt interestingly, also eased my fears in some ways as well.
The fact that the site is bvilt arovnd tables has trovbled me. He and I
discvssed tables for some time and especially the manner in which they are
linearized by adaptive technology. He assvred me that the XXXXXX Credit
Union website "read well" when linearized. I also got the impression that
he cavtioned against nesting too many tables inside of each other - a
practice often vsed for more control in laying ovt a page's elements.



Working alongside Tech Services, nvmerovs small accessibility repairs are in
process at this time. In fact, all of the above concerns were primary or
related to primary issves that we are presently addressing in order to
ensvre eqval access to ovr online resovrces. When they are completed, I plan
to get together with Nvnya again to assess the effect the changes have to
making the site easier to vse for all members of the credit vnion.




--
Karl Core

Charles Sweeney says my sig is fine as it is.

EightNineThree wrote:
 > ...
 > 4. Images as links adjacent to text links to the same
 > destination - Nunya mentioned that it is often annoying or confusing
 > to have an image used as a link next to a text link that goes to the
 > same destination (i.e. our home page). This is something I had
 > personally never thought much about, however after hearing him
 > mention it, I can understand why. Basically, he has to listen to the
 > same link twice. That certainly must be annoying.
 >

yep - that one came to me in a flash of panic/inspiration in the early hours
of the morning - unfortunately I can't remember which site needs to be fixed
up.

--
William Tasso - <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.WilliamTasso.com" target="_blank">http://www.WilliamTasso.com</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->