E-mail List Archives
Re: Accessibility user testing
From: L Snider
Date: Jul 20, 2016 8:00AM
- Next message: L Snider: "Re: Accessibility user testing"
- Previous message: Maya.Sellon@shell.com: "Re: section 508 vs wcag 2.0"
- Next message in Thread: L Snider: "Re: Accessibility user testing"
- Previous message in Thread: Jennifer Sutton: "Re: Accessibility user testing"
- View all messages in this Thread
Yep, I can see that happening too and it is frustrating! In this case the
screen reader user couldn't get into the page at all, it was not good. I
would think that the Google spider would have issues too. Maybe the SEO
argument could be made (which is sad that one has to go there, but whatever
gets the job done in the end!).
Cheers
Lisa
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 8:33 AM, Moore,Michael (Accessibility) (HHSC) <
<EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
> Your example also shows why a small problem can create a really big
> barrier. I could see a development manager commenting on the report. Well
> 99% of the site is accessible. It's just the search box that is the problem
> and Google indexes our site so fixing the search is a low priority"
> Meanwhile because of the problem with the search people using screen
> readers can't get to the "accessible" part of the site.
>
> Mike Moore
> Accessibility Coordinator
> Texas Health and Human Services Commission
> Civil Rights Office
> (512) 438-3431 (Office)
>
>
- Next message: L Snider: "Re: Accessibility user testing"
- Previous message: Maya.Sellon@shell.com: "Re: section 508 vs wcag 2.0"
- Next message in Thread: L Snider: "Re: Accessibility user testing"
- Previous message in Thread: Jennifer Sutton: "Re: Accessibility user testing"
- View all messages in this Thread