WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Accessibility in Financial Tables in HTML

for

From: Chagnon | PubCom.com
Date: Oct 15, 2015 11:52AM

Sailesh wrote:
"So does it become the developer's responsibility then?"

Yes and no.

There are 3 stakeholders in accessibility:

1) Those who create and publish the content, regardless of the media, distribution method, file format, etc.

2) Those who read, access, and use the content.

3) The technology manufacturers that make the products used by people to read the content. That includes all of the AT manufacturers, as well as browser manufacturers, office software, Adobe Acrobat and its knockoffs, operating systems, etc.

All 3 stakeholders must do their part of accessibility.

As a content creator and publisher, the only part I can do is use plain language for all users, code it correctly for accessibility, visually design it for sighted users, and distribute it in formats that are accessible.

In our example from this thread, I make sure I use Unicode character 2212 for the negative numbers in my tables because of all the methods to denote a negative number, it is the most accurate way across all languages, industries, and technologies, and doesn't have multiple meanings like parentheses ( ) and the color red.

It's the job of stakeholders #2, the users, to understand what that symbol means and to set their AT to interpret it correctly.

It's the job of stakeholders #3, the technology manufacturers, to recognize, voice, and display the character in their technology.

And all 3 stakeholders do this according to the standards of WCAG, PDF/UA, etc. (who aren't stakeholders but instead are the "benevolent dictators" of this process).

If any of these stakeholders doesn't do their job, then we all fail. Personally, I think it would help greatly if someone would start citing/suing stakeholders #3. Too many of our AT don't recognize Unicode 2212 as the negative sign and either ignore it or voice it as an unknown character. It's 2015 and we've had Unicode since, what, the 1970s?

And then go on and cite/sue content creators who use the hyphen instead of the minus character for negative numbers. Or who mis-use an en-dash. And an em-dash, too. These are not new-fangled glyphs: been using them for decades since I was a typesetter and editor, and they are part of standard English grammar and punctuation. Part of this is a holdover from antique QWERTY typewriter keyboards. I have typewriters that don't have the numeral 1 and instead you use a lowercase l for that number. How accessible is that!

Sailesh wrote: "... Where does it stand in priority when there are more hard core pressing accessibility issues for content authors to tackle?"

Anyone can make an argument that every facet is just as important as the other. But that's what management/workflow specialists like myself evaluate, triage, and then create a deployment plan.

In my mind, misreading negative numbers as positive is a huge failure because it conveys the wrong information to SR users. Maybe a lawsuit based on loss of money, time, or even life/health, might prod this issue to the top of the stack.

--Bevi Chagnon

— — —
Bevi Chagnon | www.PubCom.com | <EMAIL REMOVED>
Technologists, Consultants, Trainers, Designers, and Developers
for publishing & communication
| PRINT | WEB | PDF | EPUB | Sec. 508 ACCESSIBILITY |
— — —