E-mail List Archives

Search E-mail List Archives for

Number of posts in this thread: 12 (In chronological order)

From: Terrill Thompson
Date: Fri, Apr 24 2009 6:05PM
Subject: Is email accessible?
No previous message | Next message →

We talk a lot in the web accessibility arena about the importance of
structure (e.g., HTML headings, list elements, etc.) in order to communicate
organization and facilitate navigation, which is especially helpful for
screen reader users. Since plain text email has none of this explicit
structure, and is sometimes downright unwieldy when it contains many layers
of quotes within quotes within quotes, I find myself wondering: Is this a
technology whose time has come? Should we all be moving to web-based forms
of communications? Or do the benefits of plain text email outweigh its
shortcomings?

Thanks for any thoughts or insights.

Terrill Thompson
Technology Accessibility Specialist
DO-IT, Accessible Technology
UW Technology Services
University of Washington
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
206/221-4168

From: Randi
Date: Sat, Apr 25 2009 10:50AM
Subject: Re: Is email accessible?
← Previous message | Next message →

Hi Terril,

I use web based gmail and I like it. I have to use the basic html
version, because the standard view is too fancy for the reader. Most
other blind people I've talked to about email with, use their
computer's email program. My Windows friends use Outlook, and my Apple
friend's have imported their gmail accounts to Apple's email program
using their pop addresses. They like it because it notifies them of
new emails. I have not tried this yet, because i was a gmail user
before I went blind and I'm just used to the webbased email. I like it
because it combines all emails in one subject into a thread.

The thing I find annoying a lot, is when messages are quoted in
replies. I've noticed that on this one a lot, where a previous message
is quoted before a reply, or people reply within a quote to answer
infividual questiosns. This can be hard because I have to scroll
through the quotes to find the replies. I also use the quick reply
function in gmail. Its a text edit box right below the message. When
all messages in a discussion are photed with a person's reply and I
don't realize it, I end up scrolling through all that to get to my
quick reply box. I think once I learn to navigate with headers, this
won't be so frustrating.

I am one of the few web based email users I know of, with all the
other blind and visually impaired people I talk to. They all think I'm
nuts for using the web based gmail. I just stick to what I know
though, and thats web based.

Just my two cents. :)
Randi

PS-This might be an interesting survey for webaim to conduct.

On 4/24/09, Terrill Thompson < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> We talk a lot in the web accessibility arena about the importance of
> structure (e.g., HTML headings, list elements, etc.) in order to communicate
> organization and facilitate navigation, which is especially helpful for
> screen reader users. Since plain text email has none of this explicit
> structure, and is sometimes downright unwieldy when it contains many layers
> of quotes within quotes within quotes, I find myself wondering: Is this a
> technology whose time has come? Should we all be moving to web-based forms
> of communications? Or do the benefits of plain text email outweigh its
> shortcomings?
>
> Thanks for any thoughts or insights.
>
> Terrill Thompson
> Technology Accessibility Specialist
> DO-IT, Accessible Technology
> UW Technology Services
> University of Washington
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> 206/221-4168
>
>
>
>

From: Karlen Communications
Date: Sun, Apr 26 2009 9:40AM
Subject: Re: Is email accessible?
← Previous message | Next message →

Terry:

Plain Text is still a viable option and can sometimes be navigated through
faster or easier.

I had to look this up for someone else last week so your timing is perfect
although few people use these standards/guidelines.
http://www.headstar.com/ten/

I use a screen reader and for me the "frustration" of e-mail is having the
original message above any replies although again I know some people prefer
this.

Speaking of this, does anyone know how I can switch the order of the
reply/forward content in the Mac OS mail system? I can't seem to find the
setting to have the original follow any reply text. I want my posts to have
my replies above the original post.

Cheers, Karen

From: Keith Parks
Date: Mon, Apr 27 2009 4:35PM
Subject: Re: Is email accessible?
← Previous message | Next message →

Regarding the order of the quoted material, when I hit the Reply
command, the new message opens up with the cursor positioned on a
blank line at the top of the message area, with the quoted material
below that. So it seems like if you just started typing, your message
would be arranged like you want.

How does you Mac Mail behave differently?

On Apr 26, 2009, at 8:35 AM, Karlen Communications wrote:

> [snip]
>
> Speaking of this, does anyone know how I can switch the order of the
> reply/forward content in the Mac OS mail system? I can't seem to
> find the
> setting to have the original follow any reply text. I want my posts
> to have
> my replies above the original post.
>

******************************
Keith Parks
Graphic Designer/Web Designer
Student Affairs Communications Services
San Diego State University
San Diego, CA 92182-7444
(619) 594-1046
mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
http://www.sa.sdsu.edu/communications

http://kparks.deviantart.com/gallery
----------------------------------------------------------

World Peace through Cascading Style Sheets.

From: Karlen Communications
Date: Tue, Apr 28 2009 5:20AM
Subject: Re: Is email accessible?
← Previous message | Next message →

It seems to place the cursor below the original message and I have to go to
the top and press Enter a few times to put my reply before the original
post. While I can do this for each reply or forwarded post, it would be
easier if I could choose to have my reply precede the original post.

Cheers, Karen

From: Randi
Date: Tue, Apr 28 2009 3:35PM
Subject: Re: Is email accessible?
← Previous message | Next message →

Hmm that's odd. Maybe it is something in the mac mail settings? On the
web based gmail, my cursor is at the top of the quoted reply. Think
I'll stick to web based haha.

On 4/28/09, Karlen Communications < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> It seems to place the cursor below the original message and I have to go to
> the top and press Enter a few times to put my reply before the original
> post. While I can do this for each reply or forwarded post, it would be
> easier if I could choose to have my reply precede the original post.
>
> Cheers, Karen
>
>

From: John Foliot
Date: Tue, Apr 28 2009 5:55PM
Subject: Re: Is email accessible?
← Previous message | Next message →

This.





What is wrong with top posting?





>

From: Rich Pedley
Date: Wed, Apr 29 2009 2:00AM
Subject: Re: Is email accessible?
← Previous message | Next message →

On 29/04/2009 00:52, John Foliot wrote:
> This.
>
>
>
>
>
> What is wrong with top posting?


You really want me to answer that?

Rich

From: Moore,Michael
Date: Wed, Apr 29 2009 7:30AM
Subject: Re: Is email accessible?
← Previous message | Next message →

We have been dealing with a few issues related to email accessibility
for JAWS users since our agency has migrated to MS Office 2007. Outlook
2007 does not use the IE rendering engine to display HTML emails. For
emails composed in Outlook this is not a problem and the structure and
alternative text is delivered nicely. However, many newsletters are
distributed containing structure that is not supported well by the MS
Office HTML rendering engine. This is particularly a problem when
attempting to navigate an email where the HTML is dependent on table
layout. JAW tends to just stop reading at a certain point. Since many
email programs including Outlook 2007 do not support CSS positioning
table layout is very common. Our JAWS users have developed a couple of
strategies for reading these types of emails. First, force the email to
open in IE. This usually allows proper rendering and reading but does
not offer the opportunity for a reply. Second, copy and paste the email
into notepad. This results in a loss of structure or hyperlinks, and
sometimes a loss of content, or rendering in a confusing order. The
third option is to have all email converted to plain text, with this
last choice the user looses the structure and sometimes some of the
content and reading order may suffer as well.

My recommendation is to keep all emails simple. If desired, provide a
link to a well formed web presentation of the material contained in the
email. Adding basic structure such as lists or headings will be
beneficial for people who view the email as HTML but keep in mind that
people who choose to receive all email as plain text will not get the
structure.

As to top or bottom posting. Is it really necessary to quote the entire
thread? How about just quoting the relevant pieces along with who asked
them with answers in line. Sometimes it may not be necessary to quote
anything, particularly when adding your voice to a discussion. The
subject line of the email may be sufficient.

Mike Moore
(512) 424-4159

From: Randi
Date: Wed, Apr 29 2009 9:30AM
Subject: Re: Is email accessible?
← Previous message | Next message →

For the problems with Outlook, is there a way to do like Google does
when a search result is a pdf? When I run across a pdf in a search
result, I always click "view as html". Is there some way to do this
with emails for Outlook?

As for top posting and quotes, there's nothing wrong with it, its just
quite a pain to navigate through with a screnreader. The message
before last, quoted the short message, and between the first word and
the one sentence, I arrowed down about 5 lines before there was any
text. When an entire message is quoted, with replies intermingled, I
have to read through the whole thing to find replies. The suggestion
of only quoting relevant information is a good one, as far as ease for
screen reader users. A sighted person could skim through what they
know they've already read to find answers within a quote.

Randi

On 4/29/09, Moore,Michael < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> We have been dealing with a few issues related to email accessibility
> for JAWS users since our agency has migrated to MS Office 2007. Outlook
> 2007 does not use the IE rendering engine to display HTML emails. For
> emails composed in Outlook this is not a problem and the structure and
> alternative text is delivered nicely. However, many newsletters are
> distributed containing structure that is not supported well by the MS
> Office HTML rendering engine. This is particularly a problem when
> attempting to navigate an email where the HTML is dependent on table
> layout. JAW tends to just stop reading at a certain point. Since many
> email programs including Outlook 2007 do not support CSS positioning
> table layout is very common. Our JAWS users have developed a couple of
> strategies for reading these types of emails. First, force the email to
> open in IE. This usually allows proper rendering and reading but does
> not offer the opportunity for a reply. Second, copy and paste the email
> into notepad. This results in a loss of structure or hyperlinks, and
> sometimes a loss of content, or rendering in a confusing order. The
> third option is to have all email converted to plain text, with this
> last choice the user looses the structure and sometimes some of the
> content and reading order may suffer as well.
>
> My recommendation is to keep all emails simple. If desired, provide a
> link to a well formed web presentation of the material contained in the
> email. Adding basic structure such as lists or headings will be
> beneficial for people who view the email as HTML but keep in mind that
> people who choose to receive all email as plain text will not get the
> structure.
>
> As to top or bottom posting. Is it really necessary to quote the entire
> thread? How about just quoting the relevant pieces along with who asked
> them with answers in line. Sometimes it may not be necessary to quote
> anything, particularly when adding your voice to a discussion. The
> subject line of the email may be sufficient.
>
> Mike Moore
> (512) 424-4159
>
>

From: David Andrews
Date: Wed, Apr 29 2009 1:15PM
Subject: Re: Is email accessible?
← Previous message | Next message →

At 02:55 AM 4/29/2009, you wrote:
>On 29/04/2009 00:52, John Foliot wrote:
> > This.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > What is wrong with top posting?
>
>
>You really want me to answer that?
>
>Rich


DA: Well, I didn't top post in this instance, because I would guess
from your message that you are against it, but I did so as a courtesy to you.

I would just say that for some people top posting is the preferred
style. This is particularly true for many blind persons. I am blind
and run some 150 lists, and top posting is the de facto agreed upon
style for all of them. We can read the new stuff further, and read
down further if we need more information or background. However with
in-line posting we always have to search for new stuff which may be
scattered throughout the message.

My overall point is that there is no right or wrong here, each list
should do what is comfortable for the majority of its members. Your
needs and style aren't mine, and you shouldn't dismiss me with a
flippant answer that implies there is only one answer -- yours.

Dave



>

From: Rich Pedley
Date: Wed, Apr 29 2009 3:25PM
Subject: Re: Is email accessible?
← Previous message | No next message

On 29/04/2009 20:12, David Andrews wrote:
> At 02:55 AM 4/29/2009, Rich Pedley wrote:
>> On 29/04/2009 00:52, John Foliot wrote:
>>> This.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> What is wrong with top posting?
>>
>> You really want me to answer that?

> DA: Well, I didn't top post in this instance, because I would guess
> from your message that you are against it, but I did so as a courtesy to you.
>
[snip]

Actually you are only partially correct - in that I do prefer bottom
posting. But I've been around for a number of years now and am more
used to it than top posting.

Top posting is usually preferred by people that use screen
readers(amongst the blind people I have conversed with anyway). Though
I think the developers of said software should make it easier to skip
portions of quoted text in email, especially as the conventional quote
character > has been around longer than I have.

But when people insist on not snipping, leaving in huge chunks of
unnecessary gumf, then top posting is actually superior.

However, trying to join in an existing conversation becomes much more
difficult when everyone top posts - you have read down, scroll up,
read down, scroll up etc etc. By interspersing replies and snipping to
the minimum you can read the flow of what has been said a lot easier.

So I'm much like yourself, whatever fits in with majority. I just wish
people would snip more.

Rich