Email Access:
From the Perspective of an Individual with Visual Impairment

Introduction

As an individual who is legally blind, I use a screen reader, JAWS (Job Action with Speech), to function on a computer. If you are new to this assistive technology, JAWS is a software application used by individuals who have a visual impairment so they may access a computer. Simply put, it converts text to speech. For example, JAWS can read a document that is opened in Microsoft Word and it provides synthesized voice output so they may hear the contents. It also helps individuals navigate around the document to get all needed information. In Internet Explorer, JAWS provides an option to the user to get a list of links that allows the user to get to the link they need without reading through the entire web page. Since I am a power user of this technology I often receive questions about the best ways to deliver, or send, content so that others who use JAWS will benefit.

This month I would like to discuss my experiences receiving email. Email is a common means of communication for everyone, including people with disabilities. With the help of screen readers, individuals with visual impairments have access to a host of applications, including email. Email is powerful for all of us as it keeps us connected to others and is often critical for employment. However, given the various formats available to send email messages, it is becoming more difficult for those who use screen readers to access email and make sense of the messages sent. I am sure that other individuals with visual impairments have had different experiences with email and finding the formats and programs that work best for them. This article describes my experience using JAWS 5.1 along with Outlook Express to access my emails.

HTML Email

The most common formats of email are HTML and plain text. I find the benefits of HTML-based emails to be that they are easier for me to navigate through links, headings, and tables. Of course this is only if the HTML-based email has been prepared with accessibility in mind. Accessible emails in an HTML format enable me to use the full functionality available in my screen reading software. For example, on WebAIM’s web site, if I were to look for the link to this article on a link list, the link would be displayed as “Email Access: From the Perspective of an Individual with Visual Impairment” instead of the URL of the link. Having the text of the link displayed instead of the URL, helps me easily find the link I am looking for. If the HTML-based email has been prepared without accessibility in mind it leaves me unable to access the information that has been sent to me. For example, the most common problem I run into is the use of non-text elements (e.g., images, links) that do not have alternative text; this is also the most common accessibility problem on the Web. The only information I get from the screen reader in these situations is nonsensical.

Plain Text Email

The greatest advantage of text-based emails is that accessibility is built into the format. I am able to access the email and get the information that I need with plain text. The confusion for me begins when there are several links included within the email. With JAWS I can look at a list of all the links in the email. However, this does little good in most text emails because there is no text associated with the links. Thus, I have to read through the text email to determine which link is associated with which text. It also gets confusing when individuals include different symbols to represent headings or the beginning of paragraphs within the email. JAWS reads each individual character aloud creating extraneous noise!

Obstacles

My main obstacle is that although accessible HTML-formatted emails are more usable with my assistive technology, a good majority of these emails are not designed with accessibility in mind. This is a good example of the misuse of a technology that could provide greater access and usability for all but instead has become a barrier.

Another common confusion that I experience is in how people reply to messages in email forums or ListServs. When people try to insert a portion of their message between the email that they receive, and the posting that they provide, it is difficult to follow the flow of the message or even know who is talking. Here is an example:

The email states:

“I am positive this aspect is inaccurate because it has been proven. I have also found in my research…”

Another person responds by inserting their reply:

“I am positive this aspect is inaccurate because it has been proven. - inserted text - I have a resource that could prove you wrong about this theory.- inserted text- I have also found in my research…”

In this situation I am not able to distinguish where the new message was inserted unless I listen very intently.

HTML or Plain Text?

If you were to ask me to choose my ideal format for emails it would be difficult for me to answer. I would say that there are benefits for both HTML- and plain text-formats. For simple emails I would rather receive them in a plain text-format because accessibility is built in. But if the email includes links, tables or other features, I would rather receive it in an accessible HTML-format because the screen reader enables me to navigate around these features more efficiently. For email-based ListServs and discussion forums, there has been an ongoing argument around the use of the top post. As a screen reader user, I have no problem understanding content from top posting. In fact, I prefer top posting. This is because it separates the new message from the old message and eliminates the confusion that I encounter when determining which part of the new message refers to the old message; this is provided that, if you top post you remove all the unessential information from the prior email.

Conclusion

I believe if people were aware of the issues involved with assistive technologies and users of all abilities they would increase the accessibility and usability of their emails. I look forward to the day when technology provides more solutions than problems.