Thread Subject: Re: Web Gaps - keyboard operation

Note

This archival content is maintained by WebAIM and NCDAE on behalf of TEITAC and the U.S. Access Board . Additional details on the updates to section 508 and section 255 can be found at the Access Board web site.

From: Robinson, Norman B - Washington, DC
Date: Thu, Jan 18 2007 3:25 PM

Sean,

What I'm most interested in suggesting is that there are many graphic
functions that can be accessible and the standards should not discourage
their implementations.

Yes, the scripting is indication that a textual version can impact
graphic functions. I can also see that software can provide buttons that
run such a script (ala VBScript off of toolbar buttons if you like the
example). So just because you _can_ use the mouse to visually circle the
eyes and apply functions such as blur or red-eye removal doesn't mean
you can't do it from the keyboard and make it work with a screen reader.

If I find that CorelDraw vs. PhotoManip2.0 both meet my business need,
but find that CorelDraw provides text fields to allow access that
PhotoManip2.0 does not, then under Section 508 I legally have to
purchase CorelDraw. Section 508 makes things possible. While I don't
suggest that all software *must* provide such a function, I do suggest
that I have a legal and practical mandate to promote the accessible text
alternatives when either software meets my business needs. I don't want
to hear "It isn't practical" I want to hear vendors say "our is
accessible and meets your business needs" and I want to have the vendors
pick up on this an protest where it can let them advance the state of
accessibility.

Again, my point is to not say "it isn't practical and lets make sure in
the discussion of the law that we point this out" as to say "let us
evaluate on the standards and implementations may be created that are
accessible, so why discourage vendors from doing so?".

Regards,


Norman B. Robinson
Section 508 Coordinator
IT Governance, US Postal Service
phone: 202.268.8246


-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Sean
Hayes
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 4:05 PM
To: TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] Web Gaps - keyboard operation


Yes Photoshop allows scripting, albeit not with LISP.

So, if you are saying that:

(define (my-make-new-image)
(let* ((image (car (gimp-image-new 256 256 RGB)))
(layer (car (gimp-layer-new image 256 256
RGB-IMAGE "foobar" 100 NORMAL-MODE))))
(gimp-drawable-fill layer BG-IMAGE-FILL)
(gimp-image-add-layer image layer 0)
(gimp-display-new image)
image))

[extracted from GIMP-FU ]

Is an acceptable keyboard replacement for drawing a word on a grey
background then the argument is going in a direction I had not
anticipated, and in that case yes I accept it is possible to provide
keyboard access to all functions of software.

I still assert however, that it is not possible to recreate the nuance
of a human performance using such a system. If this aspect is not a
requirement, and it is not intended that this provision imply that the
features necessarily be usable to facilitate equal performance using the
software (or even usable at all except by programmers) then I'm happy to
continue with the existing text.

[I note that the red-eye removal script does require the user to select
the red pupils first, btw]

Sean Hayes
Standards and Policy Team
Accessible Technology Group
Microsoft
Phone:
mob +44 7977 455002
office +44 117 9719730

-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of
Robinson, Norman B - Washington, DC
Sent: 18 January 2007 20:43
To: TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] Web Gaps - keyboard operation

I don't know in how to tell you to do such a thing in Photoshop. What I
can tell you is that it is possible (perhaps not with Photoshop). If you
want an example of something to work with and debate, what about
Script-fu and The Gimp
(http://www.seul.org/~grumbel/gimp/script-fu/script-fu-tut.html#intro)?
This is a scripting extension that allows you to manipulate graphic
images. It has been used on web sites to automatically perform image
functions. Perhaps a better example would be a working script that
performs red-eye removal technique:
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6567

My point being that I don't have to be specific to insist the Section
508 standards allow such a thing (but hopefully I provided useful
examples for your consideration).

Regards,

Norman B. Robinson
Section 508 Coordinator
IT Governance, US Postal Service
phone: 202.268.8246


-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of David
Poehlman
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 2:15 PM
To: TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] Web Gaps - keyboard operation


If I use the smudge tool in photoshop to blend colors, how do we do this
effectively without the visual component?

On Jan 18, 2007, at 12:08 PM, Robinson, Norman B - Washington, DC wrote:

Gregg,

I have to say I like the existing language used in software and
operating systems as well, so I agree with Don.

For the benefit of the new readers that language is: (a) When
software is designed to run on a system that has a keyboard, products
functions shall be executable from a keyboard where the function itself
or the result of the function can be discerned textually.

I would like to understand your examples. Finger painting isn't
electronic & information technology (E&IT). Flying a helicopter
real-time isn't E&IT. Computer aided design (CAD) is E&IT. I could
design a system that would allow electronic finger painting using a
touch pad. I could design it such as there are text equivalents for all
the functions and provide it accessibly. I can design a system to fly a
helicopter via E&IT. I can make it accessible. I can make CAD functions
accessible. Please help me understand your example and thus your
arguments.

Finally, do you think the existing preamble is a good example? I
note the recommendation for a explanation. Perhaps in the refresh it
would be useful to have clearer direction to consult the preamble during
the interpretation of the technical standards. On that note, I would
like to specifically recommend that the preamble eliminate discussion in
the response justifying inaccessibility; software exists that allows
"selection of a paintbrush, picking a color, and drawing a design". The
difficulty is not what is important, that is a value judgment I don't
want to see continued in the refresh. (See Preamble discussion on
1194.21(a) via
http://www.access-board.gov/sec508/preamble.htm#Subpart%20B for more
information).

Regards,


Norman B. Robinson
Section 508 Coordinator
IT Governance, US Postal Service
phone: 202.268.8246


-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Gregg
Vanderheiden
Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2007 10:39 PM
To: 'TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee'
Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] Web Gaps - keyboard operation


Hmmmm. It does sound a little arcane. However it is in fact the real
problem. We can create keyboard access except when the input required
is analog in nature (not a discreet item) and has a time dependent
aspect to it (so you can't just type in numbers to specify an analog
number).

Finger painting is one example. Flying a helicopter in real time is
another.

CAD is not.

The problem with the existing text is that the problem isn't whether you
can describe the task or output in text. It is whether the action
actually
requires input that cannot be done from a keyboard. I have had people
think we were talking about voice control or natural language control by
typing into the keyboard. That was really confusing to them. I also
have people saying that with enough words you can describe anything.
And any limit on words raises the question of why that number of words.
So I don't think the current wording does either.


Maybe we go with the new words and a good description to explain?


Gregg
-- ------------------------------
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of
> Barrett, Don
> Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2007 2:48 PM
> To: TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
> Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] Web Gaps - keyboard operation
>
> Sorry, but I am not sure "time-dependent analogue input"
> really gets at the issue. Actually, I think it avoids the issue by
> using an intimidating arcane phrase which no developer I have ever
> worked with will understand. And when they ask me what it means, I
> will have to use phrases which should have been in the standard in the
> first place. It confuses rather than clarifies.
>
> I missed the call, but what's wrong with the standard as it exists
> now.
>

WebAIM is an initiative of:
Center for Persons with Disabilities (CPD) Utah State University