WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Web Analytics

for

From: Ryan Hemphill
Date: Apr 10, 2012 9:09AM

When I read the reason for not wanted to be identified as using an
accessibility technology, I gave a big sigh yesterday.

You can't hide the fact that you are a screen reader user. Anyone with any
understanding of screen reader behaviors would be able to detect your
technology almost immediately. Some of them are very straightforward.

(1) Clicking on a hidden link/anchor/button within a page. While this is
listed as an accessibility technique/practice, it's a red flag that you are
a screen reader user. No one else would see it in the first place and
there is definitely no one that would be able to click on it.

(2) Tabbing a lot. One focus jump after another going all over the entire
page (let along the entire site) unless it was a form would immediately
give a high probability of the user leveraging a screen reader or some
other accessibility software.

(3) Tabbing + Click event. This one would be a very strong indicator. If
the user was tabbing a lot and then clicked (via the simulated click event
that screen readers all use), the probability that the user is navigating
via screen reader is very very high. Why else would anyone tab through an
entire site only to use a mouse click once they have found what they were
looking for?

(4) I can detect, at this time, whether you are using JAWS, NVDA or
VoiceOver in a heartbeat. I have 2 methods I could use in JAWS, and might
even be able to figure out the version of JAWS with a little bit of extra
research. Given the information you have just provided (thank you for
that), I will avoid releasing how I can do this, but suffice to say - it
isn't hard once you really understand the behavioral differences from each
other and keyboard/non-screen reader users as a whole.

We need to revisit this issue. There is just no way you are going to be
able to hide many accessibility technologies from any developer on the web.
If someone has nefarious purpose for detection of your screen reader
technology or wants to detect the likeliness that you are a keyboard only
user that might have motor skill impairments, for example, you are not
going to be able to stop them.

Furthermore, you are creating a situation that makes it extraordinarily
difficult to deal with the differences between screen readers. The
compatibility issues that present themselves in rich internet applications
already make it so that JAWS, NVDA and VoiceOver are the only possible
means to handle things like focus management because it is that complex to
begin with. Add on the fact that they each handle it differently and you
are really looking at a major break between the desired avoidance of
detection and reality of making Rich Internet Apps work for these programs.
Developers who are doing Rich Internet Apps need to know what you are
using especially when the RIA becomes complex.

In our current situation at my company, we are required by law to provide
accessible solutions for screen reader users, but there is more than one
Rich Internet App in our company that require knowledge of which (JAWS,
NVDA or VoiceOver) screen reader is being used to insure failures
(interaction or formatting) don't occur. There is too much going on in
these apps for the SR software to handle it without some help as well. I
could go on for at least an hour or two about how these situations come
about and what we are doing to resolve them but mark my words, there is no
question at all that we need to know what we're working with.

I get why no one wants to be identified. No one wants their information
broadcasted to companies that want to exploit their data. It is invasive
and unsetting - I completely understand the objection.

But it isn't going to allow screen reader technologies (or others for that
matter) to maintain the pace of development that we are all witnessing even
now. I even remember seeing a post about half a year ago by a Google
employee that was stating how making some technologies accessible at this
time was extraordinarily difficult. This is Google we are talking about, a
company that hires super-geniuses to write their software - and they're
saying they can't the target. Now granted, I'm sure that there are those
among you that see this as an excuse or lack of knowledge on that person's
part - but for a massive technology driven company to have an employee
state publicly their doubts in creation of RIA accessibility - that's a
very bad sign. And we aren't doing them or any other design dev teams any
favors (or the user base it affects) by hiding the fact that you are a
screen reader user or have some other a11y tech-specific need.

If this post needs to move to a new discussion (probably not a bad idea) I
would like to continue this conversation further with anyone that wishes to
state their opinion. I am open to harsh criticism, so fire away, but I
feel very strongly that this perspective is going to hold back
accessible-friendly technology for the web in a critical and unfortunate
way. Don't get me wrong, I care very much about doing the right thing, but
as the assessment of a 15 year veteran in design/development, there is no
way this is going to work in the long run - and I am not the only person
that would tell you that.

We need to be open to telling the dev teams what tech we're shooting for.
A no-holds-barred approach to keep up with the pace we are seeing. It's
not going to slow down and you can't predict what is coming up next. I am
very unsettled and concerned by this issue.


Ryan.