WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Audio Eye


From: Birkir RĂșnar Gunnarsson
Date: Jun 28, 2010 6:27AM

What do they mean by "patented" technology?
Does it mean that no one can change it, or it costs a fortune to eploy?
Can that be said to be an accessibility solution if it costs a
fortunate to make your site accessible, rather than just to ensure the
underlying html works, documents are accessible and leave it up to the
A.T. software to convey that information to the users.
NVDA does a pretty good job of vast majority of web pages and it is
free and open source.
I think effort on behalf of government or others to create costly
technology to make their information accessible using one specific set
of tools is doomed to fail in any case, and I am sure there is a way
to expose flaws in this fairly easily, though I must admit I have not
tried it yet.
I do not particularly want to, but I suppose I should, to know better
what it is all about.

On 6/28/10, Tania < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
> i think audio eyes website have laryngitis or expect the blind to listen
> with their eyes.
> cheers
> tania
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Terrill Bennett" < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> Sent: Sunday, June 27, 2010 9:09 PM
> Subject: [WebAIM] Audio Eye
>> Greetings,
>> It's a red-letter day for those with disabilities! There's a new,
>> patented technology available that "delivers an Internet service that
>> converts and indexes Internet content and automates multi-format
>> publishing so that everyone seeking Audio Eye enabled content can
>> access Internet content."
>> According to Audio Eye the new patented technology "effectively meets
>> required criteria and standards of Section 508 legislation and needs
>> of disabled, physically challenged, learning, hearing or visually
>> impaired, low vision, dyslexic, autistic, elderly, even internet
>> novices and mobile users."
>> That just about covers everyone, doesn't it? Perfect!
>> Now, for those who are truly visually impaired and rely on Assistive
>> Technology (AT), please copy/paste the following link into your
>> browser, SILENCE your screen reader or other AT software and put your
>> mouse away, and go learn about the new, patented technology directly
>> from Audio Eye:
>> http://www.audioeye.com
>> Wow! That was quite educational, wasn't it? Reminds me of an old
>> Simon & Garfunkel song.
>> I learned about this amazing technology from an article touting not
>> only the new technology, but that Congressman Raul M. Grijalva (D -
>> Arizona) has employed said technology on his official Congressional
>> website. Here's the article:
>> http://www.marketwatch.com/story/united-states-congressional-website-adopts-patented-audio-eye-accessibility-technology-2010-06-09?reflink=MW_news_stmp
>> or: http://tinyurl.com/28wbfbl
>> Let's all go look at Congressman Raul M. Grijalva's website using
>> only the new technology. Again, make certain your screen reader/AT is
>> OFF before enjoying the technology at work:
>> http://grijalva.house.gov/
>> My brief analysis is:
>> 1. You must be able to see the screen in some fashion and be able to
>> use a mouse or recognize that tabbing 7 times has placed focus onto
>> the Audio Eye link in order to initialize the technology. Seems the
>> site has turned off the dotted outlines on links that have focus in
>> both IE8 and Firefox 3.6.6, so I was forced to watch the status bar
>> in order to know when I was on the Audio Eye link - good luck!
>> 2. If you wait long enough once the technology begins reading the
>> "links" to content, you eventually get a list of available action
>> keys. If it's your first use of the technology, you'll have no idea
>> what to do in order to activate content, move about, adjust the
>> volume, search, etc.
>> 3. You'll need to memorize the keystrokes used to interact with the
>> technology VERY quickly - there's no "repeat the help" key that I can
>> hear. The only way I could hear the keystrokes a second time was to
>> sit and wait for it to loop. Of course, you get to hear the list of
>> content before the help, each time.
>> 4. Meeting the requirements for being accessible doesn't mean the
>> site IS accessible-friendly.
>> In case you can't tell, I'm less than impressed. Am I daft, or is the
>> Congressman wasting our tax dollars? Is this an example of "Meet the
>> criteria, Fail the user." If this is an example of all that is
>> required for a site to technically conform to the standards, then I
>> fear conformance.
>> Your thoughts?
>> -- Terrill --