Thread Subject: Re: Low vision concern -graphics as navigationaltools

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: tom brett
Date: Mon, Apr 23 2007 1:15 PM

...but in this case the purchaser is prohibited by network/agency policy
from implementing the solution. A low vision user in the department of
widgets may convince their management chain to upgrade to a version of
software that is more accessible...this chain would include the employee's
supervisor and the EEO staff. After the software has been 'purchased' or
downloaded the network management staff says that the software cannot be
installed because it does not conform to the Agency's IT infrastructure.

I would think that a recommendation from the Web/Software Subcommittee to
the Access Board along the lines: "When user agents have been identified
that improve the access to web or software content for people with
disabilities, these user agents will be made available at the request of
the user."

-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Peter Korn
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 2:37 PM
To: TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] Low vision concern -graphics as
navigationaltools

Tom,

We have that problem generally - any purchaser can potentially decide
that they don't want to upgrade to something new, even if that new thing
is more accessible. There is nothing special here about the web &
graphics magnification.


Regards,

Peter Korn
Accessibility Architect,
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
> << I think we will be far more successful in the field by pushing web
> browers to provide graphics magnification
>
> Network Security and stability is a major consideration in federal
agencies.
> While we may be successful by pushing web browsers to provide graphics
> modification, if the government agency does not implement the new browser
> the standard would be useless. Agencies would state that network security
> and network stability supersede the need for a new browser.
>
> Of course the user could always claim that they need the new browser and
get
> it under Section 504.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Peter
Korn
> Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 12:19 PM
> To: TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
> Subject: Re: [teitac-websoftware] Low vision concern -graphics as
> navigationaltools
>
> I believe the Opera browser has supported magnifying graphics for
> several years now as well.
>
> I think this is a good instance of a general case - when do we "fix" a
> problem in the content, and when do we "fix" it it in the content viewers.
>
> In general, it is always harder to fix problems in content, because
> there are a lot more folks authoring content then creating content
> viewers. In particular, a whole lot more people creating government
> websites than creating web browsers. Given that fact, I think we will be
> far more successful in the field by pushing web browers to provide
> graphics magnification - though I recognize that a magnified graphic
> won't look as good as a graphic rendered at higher resolution from the
> start.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Peter Korn
> Accessibility Architect,
> Sun Microsystems, Inc.
>
>
>> You need to be using the zoom tool (found in the bottom right corner).
>> IE7 will go up to 1000% magnification from this tool. The
>> view>textsize menu is specifically for changing text size; since menu
>> images are not encoded as text they don't get scaled (however the
>> combination of largest and 1000% will get you some very large text).
>>
>> I can see that there may be adoption issues until applications are
>> upgraded to work with the newer browsers, however the fact that some
>> users are forbidden to use the tools does not change the fact this
>> facility is available and so web authoring guidelines that encourage
>> users to use this feature would be a good idea.
>>
>> Sean Hayes
>> Standards and Policy Team
>> *Corporate Accessiblity Group
>> Microsoft
>> *Phone:
>> mob +44 7977 455002
>> office +44 117 9719730
>>
>> *From:* = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] *On Behalf Of *tom
>> brett
>> *Sent:* 23 April 2007 15:45
>> *To:* 'TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee'
>> *Subject:* Re: [teitac-websoftware] Low vision concern -graphics as
>> navigationaltools
>>
>> I would also think that the use of Firefox would be forbidden as a
>> possible network security issue just like IE7. The only issue that I
>> have with using IE 7 is the limited magnification that is provided as
>> part of it. Even using the 'largest' under VIEW is not sufficient for
>> me in some cases.
>>
>> *From:* = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] *On Behalf Of
>> *Smith, Jamie
>> *Sent:* Monday, April 23, 2007 10:30 AM
>> *To:* TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
>> *Subject:* Re: [teitac-websoftware] Low vision concern -graphics as
>> navigationaltools
>>
>> At this time because IE 7 doesn't work with our State Human Resource
>> Program, everyone has to use IE 6. No upgrades allowed. Firefox will
>> not work the State Human Resource Program either. I've been wanting to
>> look at IE 7 but until the state program is fixed all state workers
>> must use IE 6.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> *From:* = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] *On Behalf Of
>> *Sean Hayes
>> *Sent:* Monday, April 23, 2007 9:25 AM
>> *To:* TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
>> *Subject:* Re: [teitac-websoftware] Low vision concern -graphics as
>> navigationaltools
>>
>> I can't speak to Firefox (obviously); but IE 7 does indeed enlarge
>> graphics; and if the image is provided with sufficient resolution will
>> do so in a manner which preserves readability. IE7 does not however
>> scale the tooltip generated from alt text or title attribute.
>>
>> I do agree with the original post that we have focused quite heavily
>> on the contrast aspect of high visibility. Providing adequate
>> resolution is another equally important aspect which requires
>> recording. WCAG does have a requirement that text can be adequately
>> scaled; I believe this should probably extend to graphics resources.
>>
>> Sean Hayes
>> Standards and Policy Team
>> *Corporate Accessiblity Group
>> Microsoft
>> *Phone:
>> mob +44 7977 455002
>> office +44 117 9719730
>>
>> *From:* = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] *On Behalf Of *tom
>> brett
>> *Sent:* 23 April 2007 14:03
>> *To:* 'TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee'
>> *Subject:* Re: [teitac-websoftware] Low vision concern - graphics as
>> navigationaltools
>>
>> <<Is this tru for IE and FireFox?
>>
>> Yes IE and Firefox do not enlarge the graphics.
>>
>> <<? If these items are coded correctly with alt-attributes does that
>> resolve this problem for the user group you are talking about?
>>
>> I would think that a great many low vision users do not use speech out
>> put. Many low vision users need to have the text and images enlarged
>> to make them clearer or in some cases visible. While I have trained
>> myself to be able to use screen readers I do find the speech output to
>> be annoying sometimes and prefer to use zoomtext instead. Even if the
>> graphic is coded correctly the user would need to hold the mouse over
>> the graphic image in order to view the alt text.
>>
>> .
>>
>> *From:* = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] *On Behalf Of
>> *Hoffman, Allen
>> *Sent:* Monday, April 23, 2007 8:53 AM
>> *To:* TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
>> *Subject:* Re: [teitac-websoftware] Low vision concern - graphics as
>> navigationaltools
>>
>> let me write down what i read from this:
>>
>> people who are low-vision who are not using a screen magnification
>> assistive technology have difficulty using graphics-based navigation
>> items because they are not resizeable without the use of AT. Is this
>> tru for IE and FireFox? If these items are coded correctly with
>> alt-attributes does that resolve this problem for the user group you
>> are talking about? Is this more a problem based on use of image maps
>> that are not coded with alt-attributes or individual graphics used as
>> clickable items--this is often done in JavaScript AJAX type applications.
>>
>> Allen Hoffman -- 202-447-0303
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> *From:* = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
>> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] *On Behalf Of
>> *Smith, Jamie
>> *Sent:* Friday, April 20, 2007 8:32 PM
>> *To:* TEITAC Web/Software Subcommittee
>> *Subject:* [teitac-websoftware] Low vision concern - graphics as
>> navigationaltools
>>
>> I am very concerned that the needs of low vision persons are being
>> "left behind". I work for Florida Blind Services and many of our
>> customers are blind. We have more people whose needs aren't being met
>> because of low vision issues than speech or Braille users though their
>> concerns are also near and dear to my heart.
>>
>> Many users that have low vision use ONLY their browsers and operating
>> systems for accessibility needs.
>>
>> They are not using special AT. (NOTE --- I have a cognitive disability
>> and also do not use AT - folks without AT that rely on browsers or
>> operating systems may be left behind beyond the low vision users which
>> I am writing about.)
>>
>> Great sites like http://www.usa.gov/webcontent/index.shtml are using
>> images as their main navigation tool. Our low vision users that are
>> not using AT cannot access the navigation tools.
>>
>> Because of css has power to make a link look like a button I don't
>> understand why web developers are still married to using a graphic for
>> navigation rather than text. It is because of a great site like
>> http://www.usa.gov/webcontent/index.shtml still using a format for
>> navigation that is not usable by a low vision user with AT, that I
>> feel we need to have some standard to meet this need.
>>
>> Every person with a disability does not have AT. Nor does have one
>> with a disability need to purchase a high cost AT device if the
>> creators of such sites understood the need. Unfortunately, even
>> understanding the need many not be enough, so I would feel better if
>> we had a item to meet this need. It could be something to the effect
>> that navigation items shall not use graphics unless they are of the
>> type that allow for enlargement (don't know technical term).. Graphics
>> (that can't be enlarged) in text that are needed to understand text
>> should be required to use the old d html link description. Alt tags be
>> they short or long descriptions don't help low vision users that don't
>> have AT.
>>
>> Color contrast issues have been a lower issue for my users than the
>> issue of graphics for navigation, followed by graphics that were
>> needed to under the text (e.g. org chart). I don't see any item
>> meeting this need. I could be mistaken. I just want to be sure that we
>> meet everyone's needs. Everyone here wants to do that as well. So I
>> feel comfortable bringing it up. This is a great group of persons!
>>
>> Please take a few minutes to provide feedback on the quality of
>> service you received. The Department of Education values your feedback
>> as a customer. Commissioner Jeanine Blomberg is committed to
>> continuously assessing and improving the level and quality of services
>> provided to you by Department staff. Simply click on this link to the
>> "DOE Customer Survey". Thank you in advance for completing the survey.
>>
>> DOE Customer Survey
>>
>>
>
<http://data.fldoe.org/cs/default.cfm?staff= = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = %7C20:3
> 4:32%20Fri%2020%20Apr%202007>
>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>

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