WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

WebAIM-Forum Digest, Vol 136, Issue 17

for

From: surbhi Mudgal
Date: Jul 17, 2016 3:36AM

Hi All,

Good Day.

My great thanks to all for the valuable response.


Thanks & Regards,
Surbhi Mudgal.

On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 11:30 PM, < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
wrote:

> Send WebAIM-Forum mailing list submissions to
> <EMAIL REMOVED>
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://list.webaim.org/mailman/listinfo/webaim-forum
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> <EMAIL REMOVED>
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> <EMAIL REMOVED>
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of WebAIM-Forum digest..."
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Web applicationtesting (Caitlin Geier)
> 2. Accessibility user testing (Zack McCartney)
> 3. Re: Accessibility user testing (Lucy Greco)
> 4. Re: Web applicationtesting (Bossley, Pete)
> 5. Re: wcag 3.3.4 (Maxability Accessibility for all)
> 6. Re: wcag 3.3.4 (Bhaskarjyoti Hazarika)
> 7. Re: Web applicationtesting (Maxability Accessibility for all)
> 8. Re: Accessibility user testing (Maxability Accessibility for all)
> 9. Re: Question on the alt text for images... (Mike Barlow)
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Caitlin Geier < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> Cc:
> Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 14:16:31 -0400
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Web applicationtesting
> Dylan Barrell (Deque's CTO) gave a talk awhile back about automated testing
> <https://vimeo.com/151658306> which includes data about some of Deque's
> research around browser / AT combinations. About ~15 minutes into the video
> is our browser / AT testing matrix. Essentially, while it's ideal to test
> as many combinations as possible, there's usually a limited amount of time
> in which to do testing. The reasoning behind targeting certain combinations
> over others is to get the most bang for your buck - to catch the most
> issues in the least amount of time. The combinations used most frequently
> at Deque are based on support (NVDA is better on Firefox than on Chrome,
> for example) and on accuracy (NVDA presents what's actually there, while
> JAWS sometimes guesses).
>
> I haven't been able to find an accessible version of the matrix in the
> video. The top browser/AT combinations listed are:
>
> - Firefox (for Windows) / keyboard
> - Firefox (for Windows) / NVDA
> - Safari / Voiceover (desktop and mobile)
> - Firefox (for Android) / Talkback
> - Firefox (for Linux) / Orca
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Andrews, David B (DEED) <
> <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>
> > I went to a session at CSUN this year, about this very topic. Don't
> > remember who gave it, (getting old I guess,) and as I recall they of
> course
> > recommended testing as many combinations as you could, which is good
> > advice. As I recall, they said if you could only test one combo your
> best
> > bet was NVDA/Firefox. I would add if you can add a second, it should
> > probably be IE/JAWS.
> >
> > You can go too far down this rabbit hole, or simplify it too much, from
> my
> > experience.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> >
> >
> > David Andrews | Chief Technology Officer
> > Department of Employment and Economic Development
> > State Services for the Blind, 2200 University Ave. W., Suite 240, St.
> Paul
> > MN 55114
> > Direct: 651-539-2294 | Mobile: 612-730-7931
> > Web | Twitter | Facebook
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On
> > Behalf Of surbhi Mudgal
> > Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2016 11:32 PM
> > To: <EMAIL REMOVED>
> > Subject: [WebAIM] Web applicationtesting
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> >
> > Good Day.
> >
> >
> >
> > Looking for a very simple confirmation on testing a web page or web
> > application. Would just like to know if there is any basic standard rule
> > to test using different screen readers ( JAWS, NVDA, VOICE OVER) or it
> > depends up on the user comfort.
> >
> >
> >
> > And if any particular procedure to be followed can anyone please help me
> > understand the same.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks & Regards,
> >
> > Surbhi Mudgal.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
>
>
>
> --
> Caitlin Geier
> User Experience Designer
> <EMAIL REMOVED>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Zack McCartney < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> To: <EMAIL REMOVED>
> Cc:
> Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 19:09:49 +0000
> Subject: [WebAIM] Accessibility user testing
> Hi there!
>
> First off, hello all! This is my first post, excited to start learning more
> about web accessibility.
>
> Anyway, I work at a web development agency and I've been tasked with
> running a usability test on a web application we've built with a
> participant using a screenreader. Our development team just made a bunch of
> updates to the site to move it closer to ADA (Americans with Disabilities
> Act) compliance, so we're trying to find out if our first pass actually
> improved the site's accessibility and what work still needs to be done.
>
> The problem is: I've never run a usability test with a participant using a
> screenreader. I have basic experience running usability tests, so I have an
> ok handle on how to moderate a test session, but I want to learn the basics
> of testing the user-friendliness of web accessibility features.
>
> Specifically:
>
> - Do y'all have any advice on how to test the usability of a site's
> accessibility features?
>
>
> - What adaptations, if any, should I think to make to my typical
> usability test setup?
> - The participant and I will be connecting over the phone, I'm hoping
> over video call, with him sharing his screen. I have no idea if
> this'll
> work or if asking him to navigate through a video conferencing
> app (Google
> Hangouts) could complicate the test unnecessarily.
>
>
> - Should I provide the participant instructions or can I (or rather,
> typical of interacting with the web via screenreader) leave them in the
> dark, let them figure out the site on their own?
> - For a typical usability test, I'd want to the participant to know
> as little as possible about the site under test, as I want to learn
> how
> people figure out how to use a site on first encounter. But, I don't
> know
> if omitting usage instructions — part of our dev team's
> accessibility work
> — would prevent the user from even interacting with the site. I want
> them
> to at the very least to be able to access the site, even if it's
> still
> tricky to use on screenreader.
>
>
> Thanks!
> Zack McCartney
>
> PS Sorry if my question shows my ignorance of web accessibility i.e.
> anything sounds goofy or dumb. I'm totally new to the topic, trying to get
> up to speed. :)
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Lucy Greco < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> Cc:
> Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 12:16:49 -0700
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Accessibility user testing
> there is a lot to doing this but mostly you run it like any other user
> test i would not use hangouts i would use skipe if you can as it is easyer
> for the user to share screens with you and tends to be more accessable i
> run user tests like this all the time i am the screen reader user and my
> clients find this method works well lucy
>
> Lucia Greco
> Web Accessibility Evangelist
> IST - Architecture, Platforms, and Integration
> University of California, Berkeley
> (510) 289-6008 skype: lucia1-greco
> http://webaccess.berkeley.edu
> Follow me on twitter @accessaces
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Zack McCartney < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi there!
> >
> > First off, hello all! This is my first post, excited to start learning
> more
> > about web accessibility.
> >
> > Anyway, I work at a web development agency and I've been tasked with
> > running a usability test on a web application we've built with a
> > participant using a screenreader. Our development team just made a bunch
> of
> > updates to the site to move it closer to ADA (Americans with Disabilities
> > Act) compliance, so we're trying to find out if our first pass actually
> > improved the site's accessibility and what work still needs to be done.
> >
> > The problem is: I've never run a usability test with a participant using
> a
> > screenreader. I have basic experience running usability tests, so I have
> an
> > ok handle on how to moderate a test session, but I want to learn the
> basics
> > of testing the user-friendliness of web accessibility features.
> >
> > Specifically:
> >
> > - Do y'all have any advice on how to test the usability of a site's
> > accessibility features?
> >
> >
> > - What adaptations, if any, should I think to make to my typical
> > usability test setup?
> > - The participant and I will be connecting over the phone, I'm
> hoping
> > over video call, with him sharing his screen. I have no idea if
> > this'll
> > work or if asking him to navigate through a video conferencing
> > app (Google
> > Hangouts) could complicate the test unnecessarily.
> >
> >
> > - Should I provide the participant instructions or can I (or rather,
> > typical of interacting with the web via screenreader) leave them in
> the
> > dark, let them figure out the site on their own?
> > - For a typical usability test, I'd want to the participant to know
> > as little as possible about the site under test, as I want to learn
> > how
> > people figure out how to use a site on first encounter. But, I
> don't
> > know
> > if omitting usage instructions — part of our dev team's
> > accessibility work
> > — would prevent the user from even interacting with the site. I
> want
> > them
> > to at the very least to be able to access the site, even if it's
> > still
> > tricky to use on screenreader.
> >
> >
> > Thanks!
> > Zack McCartney
> >
> > PS Sorry if my question shows my ignorance of web accessibility i.e.
> > anything sounds goofy or dumb. I'm totally new to the topic, trying to
> get
> > up to speed. :)
> > > > > > > > > >
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Bossley, Pete" < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> Cc:
> Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2016 00:50:49 +0000
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Web applicationtesting
> We always test with NVDA + Firefox because that tends to get us a good
> idea of actual accessibility via web standards. We have seen cases where a
> site looks okay in JAWS but is not, JAWS just happens to be guessing
> correctly on labels and such. We will test with JAWS and IE when we are
> dealing with anything flash based.
> As far as mobile testing, that is always iOS/Voice Over and usually some
> Android + Talkback as well.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On
> Behalf Of Caitlin Geier
> Sent: Friday, July 15, 2016 2:17 PM
> To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Web applicationtesting
>
> Dylan Barrell (Deque's CTO) gave a talk awhile back about automated testing
> <https://vimeo.com/151658306> which includes data about some of Deque's
> research around browser / AT combinations. About ~15 minutes into the video
> is our browser / AT testing matrix. Essentially, while it's ideal to test
> as many combinations as possible, there's usually a limited amount of time
> in which to do testing. The reasoning behind targeting certain combinations
> over others is to get the most bang for your buck - to catch the most
> issues in the least amount of time. The combinations used most frequently
> at Deque are based on support (NVDA is better on Firefox than on Chrome,
> for example) and on accuracy (NVDA presents what's actually there, while
> JAWS sometimes guesses).
>
> I haven't been able to find an accessible version of the matrix in the
> video. The top browser/AT combinations listed are:
>
> - Firefox (for Windows) / keyboard
> - Firefox (for Windows) / NVDA
> - Safari / Voiceover (desktop and mobile)
> - Firefox (for Android) / Talkback
> - Firefox (for Linux) / Orca
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Andrews, David B (DEED) <
> <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>
> > I went to a session at CSUN this year, about this very topic. Don't
> > remember who gave it, (getting old I guess,) and as I recall they of
> course
> > recommended testing as many combinations as you could, which is good
> > advice. As I recall, they said if you could only test one combo your
> best
> > bet was NVDA/Firefox. I would add if you can add a second, it should
> > probably be IE/JAWS.
> >
> > You can go too far down this rabbit hole, or simplify it too much, from
> my
> > experience.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> >
> >
> > David Andrews | Chief Technology Officer
> > Department of Employment and Economic Development
> > State Services for the Blind, 2200 University Ave. W., Suite 240, St.
> Paul
> > MN 55114
> > Direct: 651-539-2294 | Mobile: 612-730-7931
> > Web | Twitter | Facebook
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On
> > Behalf Of surbhi Mudgal
> > Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2016 11:32 PM
> > To: <EMAIL REMOVED>
> > Subject: [WebAIM] Web applicationtesting
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> >
> > Good Day.
> >
> >
> >
> > Looking for a very simple confirmation on testing a web page or web
> > application. Would just like to know if there is any basic standard rule
> > to test using different screen readers ( JAWS, NVDA, VOICE OVER) or it
> > depends up on the user comfort.
> >
> >
> >
> > And if any particular procedure to be followed can anyone please help me
> > understand the same.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks & Regards,
> >
> > Surbhi Mudgal.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
>
>
>
> --
> Caitlin Geier
> User Experience Designer
> <EMAIL REMOVED>
> > > > >
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Maxability Accessibility for all < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> To: <EMAIL REMOVED> , WebAIM Discussion List <
> <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> Cc:
> Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2016 13:35:18 +0530
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] wcag 3.3.4
> Hi Jennison,
>
> I still feel it as violation for 3.3.4. I don't find a mechanism to check
> the data entered by the user is checked for input errors in cases where a
> manual error can happen. Eg: I can enter credit card 1 number in CC number
> field and provide CVV of credit card2. Or I want to enter the details of a
> card I have but I want to use another card. If I have a review screen I can
> check the details of the card before finalizing the purchase.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 3:21 AM, Murray Inman (DZZEX54291) <
> <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>
> > Jennison,
> > When you say "validated" I presume you mean that it is checked for
> correct
> > form (e.g. the CC # doesn't violate any rules). I would think that 3.3.4
> is
> > trying to give the user a chance to easily review what was typed in for
> > correctness rather than for correct form. The user could type in the
> > information for credit card A but meant to type in the information for
> > credit card B.
> >
> > I personally would say that it would not pass the rule.
> >
> > [image: Rio Salado College Logo]
> > [image: Rio Facebook] <https://www.facebook.com/RioSaladoCollege>
> [image:
> > Rio Twitter] <https://twitter.com/RioSaladoOnline> [image: Rio YouTube]
> > <http://www.youtube.com/user/riosaladocollege>; [image: Rio Google+]
> > <https://plus.google.com/+riosalado/about>
> > *Murray Inman*
> > System Applications Analyst / Information Services
> > Tel: 480-517-8610 | Fax: 480-377-4817 | <EMAIL REMOVED>
> > 2323 W. 14th Street Tempe, AZ 85281 | www.riosalado.edu
> > ------------------------------
> > A Maricopa Community College
> > Strengths: Individualization
> > <http://classweb.riosalado.edu/murray.inman/StrengthsQuest/>; | Ideation
> > <http://classweb.riosalado.edu/murray.inman/StrengthsQuest/>; | Relator
> > <http://classweb.riosalado.edu/murray.inman/StrengthsQuest/>; |
> > Connectedness
> > <http://classweb.riosalado.edu/murray.inman/StrengthsQuest/>; | Input
> > <http://classweb.riosalado.edu/murray.inman/StrengthsQuest/>;
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 2:41 PM, Jennison Mark Asuncion <
> > <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
> >
> > > Looking for a sanity check - imagine a screen with fields: credit card
> > > #, month and year of expiration, and postal code. The Place Order
> > > button is disabled until all fields are completed and validated (e.g.,
> > > if the CC # is incorrect, a message is dynamically displayed). Once
> > > the Place Order button is pressed, the order is in fact being placed,
> > > and there is text letting the user know this is the case.
> > >
> > > Based on WCAG 3.3.4, one of the following must be true:
> > > 1) Reversible: Submissions are reversible.
> > > 2) Checked: Data entered by the user is checked for input errors and
> > > the user is provided an opportunity to correct them.
> > > 3) Confirmed: A mechanism is available for reviewing, confirming, and
> > > correcting information before finalizing the submission.
> > >
> > > Based on this, I am saying this meets 3.3.4, specifically #2. Am I on
> > > track?
> > >
> > > Jennison
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Bhaskarjyoti Hazarika < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> Cc:
> Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2016 13:52:27 +0530
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] wcag 3.3.4
> Hi All,
>
> I think this is a typical situation where there might be a conflict between
> Accessibility and Application Security. Error identification may still be a
> challenge if it violates the security. Typically the error message will not
> say which field has the error if at all there was an error with the inputs
> submitted by the user.
>
> Regards,
> Bhaskar
>
> On Jul 16, 2016 13:35, "Maxability Accessibility for all" <
> <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>
> Hi Jennison,
>
> I still feel it as violation for 3.3.4. I don't find a mechanism to check
> the data entered by the user is checked for input errors in cases where a
> manual error can happen. Eg: I can enter credit card 1 number in CC number
> field and provide CVV of credit card2. Or I want to enter the details of a
> card I have but I want to use another card. If I have a review screen I can
> check the details of the card before finalizing the purchase.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 3:21 AM, Murray Inman (DZZEX54291) <
> <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>
> > Jennison,
> > When you say "validated" I presume you mean that it is checked for
> correct
> > form (e.g. the CC # doesn't violate any rules). I would think that 3.3.4
> is
> > trying to give the user a chance to easily review what was typed in for
> > correctness rather than for correct form. The user could type in the
> > information for credit card A but meant to type in the information for
> > credit card B.
> >
> > I personally would say that it would not pass the rule.
> >
> > [image: Rio Salado College Logo]
> > [image: Rio Facebook] <https://www.facebook.com/RioSaladoCollege>
> [image:
> > Rio Twitter] <https://twitter.com/RioSaladoOnline> [image: Rio YouTube]
> > <http://www.youtube.com/user/riosaladocollege>; [image: Rio Google+]
> > <https://plus.google.com/+riosalado/about>
> > *Murray Inman*
> > System Applications Analyst / Information Services
> > Tel: 480-517-8610 | Fax: 480-377-4817 | <EMAIL REMOVED>
> > 2323 W. 14th Street Tempe, AZ 85281 | www.riosalado.edu
> > ------------------------------
> > A Maricopa Community College
> > Strengths: Individualization
> > <http://classweb.riosalado.edu/murray.inman/StrengthsQuest/>; | Ideation
> > <http://classweb.riosalado.edu/murray.inman/StrengthsQuest/>; | Relator
> > <http://classweb.riosalado.edu/murray.inman/StrengthsQuest/>; |
> > Connectedness
> > <http://classweb.riosalado.edu/murray.inman/StrengthsQuest/>; | Input
> > <http://classweb.riosalado.edu/murray.inman/StrengthsQuest/>;
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 2:41 PM, Jennison Mark Asuncion <
> > <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
> >
> > > Looking for a sanity check - imagine a screen with fields: credit card
> > > #, month and year of expiration, and postal code. The Place Order
> > > button is disabled until all fields are completed and validated (e.g.,
> > > if the CC # is incorrect, a message is dynamically displayed). Once
> > > the Place Order button is pressed, the order is in fact being placed,
> > > and there is text letting the user know this is the case.
> > >
> > > Based on WCAG 3.3.4, one of the following must be true:
> > > 1) Reversible: Submissions are reversible.
> > > 2) Checked: Data entered by the user is checked for input errors and
> > > the user is provided an opportunity to correct them.
> > > 3) Confirmed: A mechanism is available for reviewing, confirming, and
> > > correcting information before finalizing the submission.
> > >
> > > Based on this, I am saying this meets 3.3.4, specifically #2. Am I on
> > > track?
> > >
> > > Jennison
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > >
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Maxability Accessibility for all < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> Cc:
> Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2016 15:20:13 +0530
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Web applicationtesting
> I second Caitlin . If you have only one combination time available go for
> NVDA with firefox on Windows. As others rightly pointed JAWS try guessing
> and provide accurate information to the user overwriting the source code.
> For second combination if you have time and client requests JAWS and IE on
> windows.
> For mobile Safari and Voiceover for IOS and Talkback and firefox on
> Android. I see very good accessibility support on Chrome on Android but
> have not really checked any website.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 6:20 AM, Bossley, Pete < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>
> > We always test with NVDA + Firefox because that tends to get us a good
> > idea of actual accessibility via web standards. We have seen cases where
> a
> > site looks okay in JAWS but is not, JAWS just happens to be guessing
> > correctly on labels and such. We will test with JAWS and IE when we are
> > dealing with anything flash based.
> > As far as mobile testing, that is always iOS/Voice Over and usually some
> > Android + Talkback as well.
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On
> > Behalf Of Caitlin Geier
> > Sent: Friday, July 15, 2016 2:17 PM
> > To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> > Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Web applicationtesting
> >
> > Dylan Barrell (Deque's CTO) gave a talk awhile back about automated
> testing
> > <https://vimeo.com/151658306> which includes data about some of Deque's
> > research around browser / AT combinations. About ~15 minutes into the
> video
> > is our browser / AT testing matrix. Essentially, while it's ideal to test
> > as many combinations as possible, there's usually a limited amount of
> time
> > in which to do testing. The reasoning behind targeting certain
> combinations
> > over others is to get the most bang for your buck - to catch the most
> > issues in the least amount of time. The combinations used most frequently
> > at Deque are based on support (NVDA is better on Firefox than on Chrome,
> > for example) and on accuracy (NVDA presents what's actually there, while
> > JAWS sometimes guesses).
> >
> > I haven't been able to find an accessible version of the matrix in the
> > video. The top browser/AT combinations listed are:
> >
> > - Firefox (for Windows) / keyboard
> > - Firefox (for Windows) / NVDA
> > - Safari / Voiceover (desktop and mobile)
> > - Firefox (for Android) / Talkback
> > - Firefox (for Linux) / Orca
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Andrews, David B (DEED) <
> > <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
> >
> > > I went to a session at CSUN this year, about this very topic. Don't
> > > remember who gave it, (getting old I guess,) and as I recall they of
> > course
> > > recommended testing as many combinations as you could, which is good
> > > advice. As I recall, they said if you could only test one combo your
> > best
> > > bet was NVDA/Firefox. I would add if you can add a second, it should
> > > probably be IE/JAWS.
> > >
> > > You can go too far down this rabbit hole, or simplify it too much, from
> > my
> > > experience.
> > >
> > > Dave
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > David Andrews | Chief Technology Officer
> > > Department of Employment and Economic Development
> > > State Services for the Blind, 2200 University Ave. W., Suite 240, St.
> > Paul
> > > MN 55114
> > > Direct: 651-539-2294 | Mobile: 612-730-7931
> > > Web | Twitter | Facebook
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On
> > > Behalf Of surbhi Mudgal
> > > Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2016 11:32 PM
> > > To: <EMAIL REMOVED>
> > > Subject: [WebAIM] Web applicationtesting
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Good Day.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Looking for a very simple confirmation on testing a web page or web
> > > application. Would just like to know if there is any basic standard
> rule
> > > to test using different screen readers ( JAWS, NVDA, VOICE OVER) or it
> > > depends up on the user comfort.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > And if any particular procedure to be followed can anyone please help
> me
> > > understand the same.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks & Regards,
> > >
> > > Surbhi Mudgal.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Caitlin Geier
> > User Experience Designer
> > <EMAIL REMOVED>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Maxability Accessibility for all < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> Cc:
> Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2016 19:04:07 +0530
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Accessibility user testing
> Hello Zack,
>
> I was participating in usability studies as a screen reader user for some
> time now. I ask to provide me the details on a word document or any
> accessible format to understand the task to be performed on the website.
> Eg: Find a department head email address on a government website providing
> the url. Usually I take 3 to 5 tasks on a single test. At the time of the
> test both o us get on hangout. I share my screen on a video call. I am
> asked to say aloud what I want to do or what I am doing similar to a
> cricket commentary. At the end of each task I was asked how easy/difficult
> the task is and any possible points of improvement.
> For any further questions you may can feel free to reach off-list.
>
> Best Regards
> Rakesh
>
> On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 12:46 AM, Lucy Greco < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>
> > there is a lot to doing this but mostly you run it like any other user
> > test i would not use hangouts i would use skipe if you can as it is
> easyer
> > for the user to share screens with you and tends to be more accessable i
> > run user tests like this all the time i am the screen reader user and my
> > clients find this method works well lucy
> >
> > Lucia Greco
> > Web Accessibility Evangelist
> > IST - Architecture, Platforms, and Integration
> > University of California, Berkeley
> > (510) 289-6008 skype: lucia1-greco
> > http://webaccess.berkeley.edu
> > Follow me on twitter @accessaces
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Zack McCartney <
> <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi there!
> > >
> > > First off, hello all! This is my first post, excited to start learning
> > more
> > > about web accessibility.
> > >
> > > Anyway, I work at a web development agency and I've been tasked with
> > > running a usability test on a web application we've built with a
> > > participant using a screenreader. Our development team just made a
> bunch
> > of
> > > updates to the site to move it closer to ADA (Americans with
> Disabilities
> > > Act) compliance, so we're trying to find out if our first pass actually
> > > improved the site's accessibility and what work still needs to be done.
> > >
> > > The problem is: I've never run a usability test with a participant
> using
> > a
> > > screenreader. I have basic experience running usability tests, so I
> have
> > an
> > > ok handle on how to moderate a test session, but I want to learn the
> > basics
> > > of testing the user-friendliness of web accessibility features.
> > >
> > > Specifically:
> > >
> > > - Do y'all have any advice on how to test the usability of a site's
> > > accessibility features?
> > >
> > >
> > > - What adaptations, if any, should I think to make to my typical
> > > usability test setup?
> > > - The participant and I will be connecting over the phone, I'm
> > hoping
> > > over video call, with him sharing his screen. I have no idea if
> > > this'll
> > > work or if asking him to navigate through a video conferencing
> > > app (Google
> > > Hangouts) could complicate the test unnecessarily.
> > >
> > >
> > > - Should I provide the participant instructions or can I (or rather,
> > > typical of interacting with the web via screenreader) leave them in
> > the
> > > dark, let them figure out the site on their own?
> > > - For a typical usability test, I'd want to the participant to
> know
> > > as little as possible about the site under test, as I want to
> learn
> > > how
> > > people figure out how to use a site on first encounter. But, I
> > don't
> > > know
> > > if omitting usage instructions — part of our dev team's
> > > accessibility work
> > > — would prevent the user from even interacting with the site. I
> > want
> > > them
> > > to at the very least to be able to access the site, even if it's
> > > still
> > > tricky to use on screenreader.
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > > Zack McCartney
> > >
> > > PS Sorry if my question shows my ignorance of web accessibility i.e.
> > > anything sounds goofy or dumb. I'm totally new to the topic, trying to
> > get
> > > up to speed. :)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Mike Barlow < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> Cc:
> Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2016 13:03:35 -0400
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Question on the alt text for images...
> Thanks David, so the question still remains should those types of
> punctuation be used in alt-text for images, or should simpler (but possibly
> longer) alt-text.
>
> On Jul 14, 2016 9:59 AM, "David Farough" < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> wrote:
>
> > With regard to the use of quotation and parenthesis when specifying alt
> > text, sometimes the use of parenthesis will cause a synthesizer to speak
> > the word, followed by the string contained within the parenthesis
> > without speaking the
> > parenthesis punctuation. sometimes the results are unpredictable.
> > in the alt text you quoted, see below: .
> > *Configuration dialog box with the "Next" button highlighted
> > (optionally you could simply press the enter key rather than clicking on
> > the "Next" button)*
> > I did not hear the quotes or parenthesis spoken. I did however hear
> > the asterisks as star.
> > A screen reader delivers this text as a single unit of text. The user
> > cannot examine this text unless they use a Braille display,, or are able
> > to view it on screen.
> >
> >
> >
> > .
> >
> >
> > David Farough
> >
> > Coordonnateur de l'accessibilité des applications, Services intégrés de
> > gestion des TI
> > Commission de la fonction publique du Canada / Gouvernement du Canada
> > <EMAIL REMOVED> Tél: 819-420-8418 Télécopieur :
> > 819-420-8408
> >
> > Application Accessibility Co-ordinator, Corporate IT Management
> > Public Service Commission of Canada / Government of Canada
> > <EMAIL REMOVED> Tel: 819-420-8418 / Fax: 819-420-8408
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Ce courriel est destiné exclusivement au destinataire mentionné en titre
> > et peut contenir de l'information privilégiée, confidentielle ou
> > soustraite à la communication aux termes des lois applicables. Toute
> > divulgation non autorisée, toute reproduction ou réacheminement est
> > interdit. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire de ce courriel, ou n'êtes
> > pas autorisé par le destinataire visé, ou encore, si vous l'avez reçu
> > par erreur, veuillez le mentionner immédiatement à l'expéditeur et
> > supprimer le courriel et les copies.
> >
> > This e-mail message is intended for the named recipient(s) and may
> > contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or exempt from
> > disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorized disclosure, copying or
> > re-transmission is prohibited. If you are not a named recipient or not
> > authorized by the named recipient(s), or if you have received this
> > e-mail in error, then please notify the sender immediately and delete
> > the message and any copies.
> >
> > > > > > > > > >
>
>
> > > > >
>