WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Web Analytics

for

From: Stella Mudd
Date: Apr 11, 2012 8:54AM

Ok, but you stated, "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."

So, by law you are required to provide access, and you feel the only
way to adequately
do so is by doing detection. I'm guessing other individuals are in the
same boat and could use your methodology? Confused now about what is the
proper course of action in terms of Rich Internet Applications... I
recently built a rich internet application with DOJO Toolkit and did not
run into a situation where I felt I needed to do any detection. Of course,
if I were catering to JAWS 6 that might be the case, but we had to draw
some very distinct lines just as we do with visual users (e.g. we don't
support Mac IE 5). Then again, I'm not in the same situation socially,
technologically, or legally as you and others, but would love to hear more
about it to necessitate screen reader detection in RIA. Thanks for keeping
up this lively convo!!


On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 5:25 AM, Ryan Hemphill < <EMAIL REMOVED>
> wrote:

> Happy to answer, Stella. The reason I thought I should avoid doing so is
> for the reason that seemed to be stated by many in this forum. People
> don't want to be identified via screen reader.
>
>
>
>
> On Apr 10, 2012, at 5:55 PM, Stella Mudd < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>
> > Ryan you stated "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."
> >
> > If you think it is so important, why would you avoid releasing this
> > information? I think if your methodology is sound, the community could
> use
> > your information, unless you are under some type of NDA. Let us know.
> > Thanks!
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:09 AM, Ryan Hemphill <
> <EMAIL REMOVED>
> >> wrote:
> >
> >> 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.
> >> > >> > >> > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > >