WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Screen readers usage and support

for

From: Ryan Hemphill
Date: Mar 6, 2012 1:48PM

One more thing. Be very very careful when you start adding ARIA. Make
sure you check on compatibility.

Example: When you are in Windows 7, if you place focus on a tag with the
attribute aria-labelledby="id-12345" you will not only break the screen
reader, you will cause IE to immediately crash. You literally have to put
in aria-labeledby (one "l") to stop this from happening in JAWS - and not
only does that not follow the spec, the hack won't work anywhere else - so
you need to do browser and OS detection before inserting this bad boy.

Point being, test it first before you add it. And I would suggest you add
it only when you absolutely have to because you can't get it done with
typical HTML. I can give you plenty of other examples, but I think you get
the idea.

Ryan.

On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Ryan Hemphill
< <EMAIL REMOVED> >wrote:

> I'd also like to point out that many people coding out there do not
> realize that ARIA only takes care of Screen Reader users. While this is
> not part of 508 compliance at all, it has been a general trend in
> accessibility focus with regard to online research and blogging.
>
> Simply put, many supposedly accessible solutions are really not taking of
> of anyone else except blind users. I'm just backing up Gary's point here.
> It's very easy to find the accessibility rules for the blind, but it's
> only a piece of the pie.
>
> Ryan
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 3:22 PM, Morin, Gary (NIH/OD) [E] <
> <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>
>> Keep in mind the following
>> 1. EIT products conform to Section 508
>> 2. Federal agencies comply (or not) with Section 508
>> 3. JAWS or any screen reader-compatible software does not equal
>> Section 508 conformant nor does it equal accessible to oh so many other
>> people with other disabilities.
>> 4. Accessible does not always equal Section 508-conformant
>> 5. Section 508-conformant does not always equal accessible (except
>> when the Functional Performance Criteria are taken seriously)
>> 6. Accessible for a (fill in the blank) does not necessarily mean
>> Accessible for any other (fill in the blank) - using either disabilities
>> for each blank or assistive technologies for each blank.
>> Is your Assistive Technology testing being done by real-life users of
>> that AT or by non-disabled users who really aren't fluent in the AT?
>> Is your Assistive Technology testing being done in addition to manual
>> testing based on the formal Section 508 standards from the US Access Board?
>> What company are you with?
>> Gary M. Morin, Program Analyst
>>
>> WHAT IF THE FIRST QUESTION WE ASKED WAS, "WHAT IS SO UNIQUE ABOUT THIS
>> SITUATION THAT IT JUSTIFIES EXCLUSION? INSTEAD OF, "HOW MUCH DOES IT COST
>> TO MAKE IT ACCESSIBLE?"
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jeevan Reddy [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ]
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2012 8:15 AM
>> To: WebAIM Discussion List
>> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Screen readers usage and support
>>
>> Shubik,
>> you can see the screen reader survey @
>> http://webaim.org/projects/screenreadersurvey3/
>>
>> When it comes to how many screen readers should we support there is no
>> statistics available. Follow the ARIA best practices along with the section
>> 508 standards that you follow that will enhance accessibility for most of
>> the screen readers
>>
>>
>>
>> On 3/6/12, Ilya Shubik < <EMAIL REMOVED> <mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> >>
>> wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > We have started a project at my company to ensure that webapps that we
>> > are running are Section 508 compliant. One of the questions that we
>> > are trying to wrap our heads around is whether there are some stats
>> > available on screen readers usage and its %% split between different
>> > versions.
>> >
>> > Should we be aiming to support ALL screenreaders available on market
>> > and look for most compatibility with all internet browsers. Or should
>> > we be aligning to top used screen readers?
>> >
>> > Thanks for feedback
>> >