WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Google Chrome Frame for Screen Readers?

for

From: Richard Hulse
Date: Jun 23, 2015 3:09PM

Since this my first post here, a quick introduction:

I am the digital product lead/webmaster at www.radionz.co.nz which is the
website for Radio New Zealand. We are a public radio broadcaster and we are
very focussed on accessibility, particularly at the moment making the site
more screen reader friendly.


On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 8:38 AM, Jennifer Sutton < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
wrote:

> Let's make this about complying with the specification, rather than
> representing screen reader quirks/inconsistencies.
>

This is an interesting approach and seems to me to be the same as that
taken by the Web Standards project back in the late 90s. That is: that
everyone should be using standard markup, written to spec, and let's get
the screen readers (and other tech) makers to their tools follow the spec.

In some ways the current state is similar to what we had to deal with in
terms of browser quirks in the 90s.

Perhaps we need some way to indicate to the tech if we are using
'standards' and leave all the other sites to render as 'quirks'?

In my experience, developers either get overwhelmed by the notion of having
> to learn a screen reader (so they do nothing), or they get totally
> engrossed in screen reader-centricity, so they miss the easier wins. And I
> see this especially with ARIA implementations.
>

In my case I do use a screen reader as part of my testing regime, and I use
that along with other tools to ensure the markup makes sense for as many
uses as possible. Markup may serve many clients, just as a responsive site
serves many different screen sizes.

I found learning how to drive the screen reader no more difficult than an
other new piece of software. Certainly a lot simpler than vim or emacs!

A tool that validates the markup as being 'accessibility standards
compliant' would be a big win. At the very least the average punter will
test their sites, make adjustments, and they won't be horrendous. Those in
the know can use the tool to take the site to the next level.

Could this be an online tool like the W3C validator?


Cheers,

Richard Hulse
Webmaster
Radio NZ