E-mail List Archives

Search E-mail List Archives for

Number of posts in this thread: 27 (In chronological order)

From: Raleigh Way
Date: Tue, Feb 26 2002 5:24AM
Subject: Accessibility Observations
No previous message | Next message →

Hello everyone,

I have been monitoring dialogue about accessibility issues on several
lists for the past few months. I am relatively new to accessibility
and Web page design, but not quite an amateur; I know what is
required to make a page accessible, I know the limitations of the
browsers, CSS, screen reading software, Web page layout (usability),
etc. Here is my observation:

Think for a minute about the many browsers and screen reading
software in use. We must assume there is every possible combination
in use out there. In my opinion, it is impossible to accommodate
every situation. It is unrealistic to assume that every combination
of browser/screen reader can access every "accessible" web page no
matter how well it was constructed. Ok, then, what does work? What
is the common denominator? The answer I keep coming back to is
linearity. I've surfed a lot of sites designed for people with
disabilities, e.g., schools for the blind, and the one thing that I
notice is that the sites are linear. By linear design, I mean
left-to-right layout of text to accommodate older screen readers.

Imagine going into a site (blind) and having to figure out the page
layout and jump from one column to another before you could focus on
content. Section 508 says that you can only use a text-only version
of a site if all else fails. After speaking to several blind people
about this, they said they prefer the text-only version because they
don't have to puddle-jump through a site designed for the
sited/retrofitted for the blind because it is more linear. They
prefer a smooth ride to jumping around, so I'm starting to disagree
with the "You can't use a text-only version". Hmmm... Why not just
design the main site linearly? Why not just design a site that is
visually appealing, but linear? I realize designers (especially
corporate designers) don't want to sacrifice visual appeal and layout
for the sighted just because they have to also make it accessible.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not criticizing anyone; it's just that we
find ourselves in a situation that does not have any easy answer, and
I'm grappling with trying to find something that works.

Assistive Technology still has a way to go before it is up to speed.
Right now, most of us are trying to do the best we can to make
existing technology work with AT, but it doesn't work for all AT
(browsers, screen readers, versions, etc.). I

From: Tim Harshbarger
Date: Tue, Feb 26 2002 10:51AM
Subject: RE: Accessibility Observations
← Previous message | Next message →

Oh, I am certain that a lot of people have opinions about text only pages.
I do.

You are correct. Linearization (is that even a word?) of a page's content
is beneficial for people using screen readers. However, I think "text only"
design tends to forget that there are people with other kinds of
disabilities for which a "graphical" page is beneficial.

My thoughts are that linearized content is just one of many important
elements to designing accessible pages. We also need to remember that
accessibility is much more than whether or not someone can access
information, but how efficiently someone can access that same information.

Linearized content may be more accessible, but it does create accessibility
problems from an efficiency standpoint.

If you have not had the opportunity, I would suggest to anyone (whether or
not they have a disability) to observe users with disabilities accessing
sites. Even the ones which are supposedly "accessible" can take someone
with a disability significantly longer to access information than his or her
counterpart without a disability. That may or may not be an issue with the
kinds of sites you are designing, though I expect efficiency is important to
your users even if it is unimportant to the site's owner.

Thanks!
Tim
Tim Harshbarger
Disability Support
State Farm Insurance Companies
Phone: (309) 766-0154
E-mail: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =

From: Mark Rew
Date: Tue, Feb 26 2002 6:18AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Observations
← Previous message | Next message →

Accessibility ObservationsRaleigh,

A valuable discussion. I'm in a unique position in that I'm a blind screen reader user, and the project manager for a team of Web application developers. I agree with the ease for a screen reader to read a linear text, but there are other issues. The other day I had to review several corporate policies, which are available on the corporate Website. To read these policies one starts at a page of links to each policy, then each policy has a page with additional links to subsections etc. I ended up cutting and pasting the text into a single file so I could read it from beginning to end. This was the copy I sent to my staff to review.

Having said all of that: A single linear text file does not allow for jumping to individual sections, or provide for the best use of the screen layout. There needs to be links to portions of a linear document. Therefore,the user can jump to the portion they want, while another reader can read linearly from beginning to end.

The largest problem I find with text equivalent pages is the maintenance. Often Web authors will keep the graphically designed page up to date, but not the text page. Website maintenance is a difficult phase to manage and expensive.

The newer screen readers such as Jaws 4.0x are handling features as multiple columns and tables better. I encourage professionals to use the latest tools for accessing the information they need.

If a website is going to use text alternative pages for providing access to older browsers and screen readers they should use automated tools to keep the text current with the main web pages. Plus, they must provide all of the features available from the graphical pages.

Even though I have accessibility and usability as central in the initial design there have been cases where I let less than fully compliant products be released to meet deadlines. Accessibility must be considered from the beginning of application development it is still a difficult issue to fully address.

What I find more of a problem in the usability of a site when accessing with my screen reader is to wade through many navigation links before reaching the information I wanted to read in the first place. This is why I dislike many of the frame sites. After clicking on a link then all of the frames information prior to the information I want is spoken. If I know what frame the information is in I can jump to it, but usually I'm not sure where my information is located. Thus, I scroll through text fast as possible until I come to what I want to read. Second, it is very frustrating to scroll through what seems to be hundredths of links just to read a paragraph or two only to come to a link that only says "next."

Nothing takes the place of good usability design with the reader's point of view in mind.

Mark


----- Original Message -----
From: Raleigh Way
To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 7:24 AM
Subject: Accessibility Observations


Hello everyone,


I have been monitoring dialogue about accessibility issues on several lists for the past few months. I am relatively new to accessibility and Web page design, but not quite an amateur; I know what is required to make a page accessible, I know the limitations of the browsers, CSS, screen reading software, Web page layout (usability), etc. Here is my observation:


Think for a minute about the many browsers and screen reading software in use. We must assume there is every possible combination in use out there. In my opinion, it is impossible to accommodate every situation. It is unrealistic to assume that every combination of browser/screen reader can access every "accessible" web page no matter how well it was constructed. Ok, then, what does work? What is the common denominator? The answer I keep coming back to is linearity. I've surfed a lot of sites designed for people with disabilities, e.g., schools for the blind, and the one thing that I notice is that the sites are linear. By linear design, I mean left-to-right layout of text to accommodate older screen readers.


Imagine going into a site (blind) and having to figure out the page layout and jump from one column to another before you could focus on content. Section 508 says that you can only use a text-only version of a site if all else fails. After speaking to several blind people about this, they said they prefer the text-only version because they don't have to puddle-jump through a site designed for the sited/retrofitted for the blind because it is more linear. They prefer a smooth ride to jumping around, so I'm starting to disagree with the "You can't use a text-only version". Hmmm... Why not just design the main site linearly? Why not just design a site that is visually appealing, but linear? I realize designers (especially corporate designers) don't want to sacrifice visual appeal and layout for the sighted just because they have to also make it accessible. Don't get me wrong, I'm not criticizing anyone; it's just that we find ourselves in a situation that does not have any easy answer, and I'm grappling with trying to find something that works.


Assistive Technology still has a way to go before it is up to speed. Right now, most of us are trying to do the best we can to make existing technology work with AT, but it doesn't work for all

From: Peter Van Dijck
Date: Tue, Feb 26 2002 6:26AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Observations
← Previous message | Next message →

Hi Mark,
those are interesting points. I've been trying to find out what *really* are
the important points for people using screen readers. Here's my list so far,
could you comment on this?
Most important things to do for screenreader users on websites:

1. provide either "skip navigation" link, if navigation comes before
content, or provide "skip to navigation" link, if navigation comes after
content.

2. Provide list of anchor links to subsections if the page contains a lot of
text.

3. Alt tags

4. Make it clear where they are in the site. This is often made explicit
only by visual design elements like color of tabs.

Could you and other screen reader users elaborate on the experience of using
a screen reader? Stragegies you use to make your life easier? I have used
them for testing, but I think experienced screen reader users will have
typical behaviour we need to support that I don't know about.

Thanks,
Peter


----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/

From: Ineke van der Maat
Date: Tue, Feb 26 2002 7:52AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Observations
← Previous message | Next message →

Hello Peter,

In the first place there is no alt tag:. <alt></alt> is not existing. It is an attribute belonging to more tags as simply the imagetag. Also the applet, area and input tags have alt attributes. The alt-attribute of the inputtag has no text as valid value but "CDATA".

For usability of a page it is in my eyes also important that people don't need to scroll from the left to the right side of the page. My page have therefore a maximum width of 560 px... also fitting in a televisionscreen. that does not have any scrollbar at all.

Greetings
Ineke van der Maat

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Van Dijck" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
To: < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 2:26 PM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Observations


> 3. Alt tags
>
>
> Thanks,
> Peter



----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/

From: Mark Magennis
Date: Tue, Feb 26 2002 9:28AM
Subject: RE: Accessibility Observations
← Previous message | Next message →

How people use screen readers is an interesting question. In user tests I
have found surprisingly little typical behaviour, even amongst experienced
screen reader users. Although individuals seem to have their own preferred
behaviours which they tend to stick to, I haven't seen many generally agreed
upon approaches. For example, I've seen individuals use each of the
following strategies when they arrive at a page.

- Read through the entire contents of the page before doing anything.

- Skip quickly through the contents, only reading the start of each section,
until you find a section that seems appropriate, then read that and decide
what to do.

- Read or skip until you reach link that looks like it will get you closer
to what you want, then follow it.

- If there a lot of links on the page, list them all and follow the most
appropriate one without reading anything on the page.

Sometimes it depends on the nature of the page, as in the last example. I
haven't done enough testing to say much about that though. I have also
noticed a lot of variation in users' knowledge of their screen readers.

I'd be very interested to hear from anyone who has done more than my very
limited testing. And if anyone wants to provide a large amount of funding,
I'd love to do some in depth research into this issue :-)

I'm not sure whether "skip navigation" is quite the right concept. I would
think it would be better to have links that go to named places rather than
links that simply avoid things but don't tell you where you'll end up. So
"go to main content" would seem better than "skip navigation". Or if there
is more than one main content, a table of contents would seem like a good
idea.

Mark
_______________________________________________________

Dr. Mark Magennis Head of Usability

Frontend - Usability Engineering & Interface Design
40 Westland Row, Dublin 2, Republic of Ireland

Visit our Usability Infocentre at:
www.frontend.com/usability_infocentre/

= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = tel: +353 1 241 1616
http://www.frontend.com fax: +353 1 241 1601
_______________________________________________________



>

From: Peter Van Dijck
Date: Tue, Feb 26 2002 10:00AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Observations
← Previous message | Next message →

Those observations are really useful. Have other people got more
observations to share about strategies screen reader users use to browse the
web?
Peter


----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/

From: Peter Van Dijck
Date: Tue, Feb 26 2002 10:09AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Observations
← Previous message | Next message →

> The answer I keep coming back to is
> linearity. I've surfed a lot of sites designed for people with
> disabilities, e.g., schools for the blind, and the one thing that I
> notice is that the sites are linear. By linear design, I mean
> left-to-right layout of text to accommodate older screen readers.

You do realise you can use CSS to have linear design for screen readers and
all the boxes you like for visual browsers right?
Peter


----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/

From: John Foliot - bytown internet
Date: Tue, Feb 26 2002 11:22AM
Subject: RE: Accessibility Observations
← Previous message | Next message →

Accessibility Observations<opinion>
You are right of course, linear structure will always be easier to navigate,
especially when you cannot rely on visual cues to get around. But consider
that consistant navigation also goes a long way. Providing a "skip nav"
mechanism on every page is a simple and effective way of providing a better
user experience for the visually impaired... it's not perfect but it helps.

Once we can rely on consistant and predictable CSS placement support, we can
and should use this mechanism to "layout" the GUI of our site, but still
maintain the linear structure of the documents. However, even in this
scenario, wouldn't you want the principle and secondary navigation "front
and center" (ie first) on each document, akin to a table of contents? How
else will the user know how to get around?

I'm not really sure than what you are trying to say. The majority of
today's sites ARE structured in a linear fashion, even when they are laid
out in tables. Frames have for the most part fallen from favor (although
you still run into them), and while not a given, most navigation schemes
today rely on top and left hand navigation "blocks". So it's not so much
the "visual" layout, but rather the structural and navigational layout which
is most important.
</opinion>

JF

From: Terry Brainerd Chadwick
Date: Tue, Feb 26 2002 12:30PM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Observations
← Previous message | Next message →

Raleigh wrote,

>>>They prefer a smooth ride to jumping around, so I'm starting to
disagree with the "You can't use a text-only version".>>>

Most of the people with disabilities that I have worked with-- totally
blind, visually impaired, mobility impaired--have told me that they don't
use the text-only pages when they are provided. These are the reasons they
have given:

1. From their experiences the pages are rarely equivalent and often not
maintained.
2. They believe they should be able to read the same original/main page as
anyone else.
3. They feel like second class citizens in having to use a separate page.

I have also had a couple of people tell me that they prefer properly-done
frames because they can easily jump back and forth between the content and
the navigation.

Personally, as a sighted person who wants to get to my information fast, I
use the text-only pages, especially if they are comprehensive site maps.
However, comprehensive navigation panels and site maps have accessibility
issues in that there may be hundreds of links on a singe page, which may
take longer to navigate than a half-way accessible, JavaScripted main page.

I think that it is very difficult to make an entire website that is going
to be fully accessible for everyone at every time: the needs of a person
with cognitive and learning disabilities is different than the needs of
someone who requires high magnification of a web page which is different
than the needs of someone to cannot see the web page at all and must
navigate with a braille or screen reader.

Linearization is certainly important, as is alternative "text"--transcripts
of audio, audio versions of text, graphics with equivalent information in a
text format, and so on. Not all sites, particularly small private one, can
afford to do everything, but we can all do our best. It amazes that there
are people calling themselves web designers/developers who don't use the
alt attribute, despite the fact that it has been part of standard HTML for
years.

Just my thoughts on the matter.
Terry

Terry Brainerd Chadwick, InfoQuest! Information Services
mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = 1-503-228-4023 http://www.tbchad.com
Accessibility isn't just the law; it's good business.
Optimizing Websites for Accessibility, Content, Search, & Usability


----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/

From: Raleigh Way
Date: Tue, Feb 26 2002 3:43PM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Observations
← Previous message | Next message →

Hi Peter,

You have hit on something I don't know the answer to. I know what to
expect if I design a Web page with columns much like a news paper.
The newer screen readers are capable of reading down each column as
intended. If I use CSS to create a visual layout of "boxed" text,
how does a screen reader handle that? Let me explain a little
further. If I use tables for layout, and I create, say 3 columns of
text on the page, I know that newer SRs (screen readers) can navigate
into and down each column. If I create the same visual layout, i.e.,
"columns" using CSS, do the new screen readers treat the CSS boxes
the same? I haven't tested this yet.

Thanks for your input,

Raleigh

> > The answer I keep coming back to is
>> linearity. I've surfed a lot of sites designed for people with
>> disabilities, e.g., schools for the blind, and the one thing that I
>> notice is that the sites are linear. By linear design, I mean
>> left-to-right layout of text to accommodate older screen readers.
>
>You do realise you can use CSS to have linear design for screen readers and
>all the boxes you like for visual browsers right?
>Peter
>
>
>----
>To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
>visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/


--


----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/

From: Paul Bohman
Date: Tue, Feb 26 2002 3:52PM
Subject: RE: Accessibility Observations
← Previous message | Next message →

With CSS layout, you have total control over the reading order (or at
least you have the potential for total control). Take a look at these
two test pages:

http://www.webaim.org/paul/css-linearization
http://www.webaim.org/paul/css-linearization2

Both of them have exactly the same layout, but the "boxes" (which are
div tags with positioning style elements) are read in a different order,
depending on the order in which they show up in the source code. Screen
readers ignore the visual layout of this type of CSS positioning. They
go entirely by the order of the text in the source code.

Note: I did this the quick and easy way, using Dreamweaver "layers".
There are other, more sophisticated methods, but the idea is the same.

Paul Bohman
Technology Coordinator
WebAIM (Web Accessibility in Mind)
www.webaim.org
Center for Persons with Disabilities
www.cpd.usu.edu
Utah State University
www.usu.edu

From: Holly Marie
Date: Tue, Feb 26 2002 6:11PM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Observations
← Previous message | Next message →

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Bohman" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
To: < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 4:52 PM
Subject: RE: Accessibility Observations


> With CSS layout, you have total control over the reading order (or at
> least you have the potential for total control). Take a look at these
> two test pages:
>
> http://www.webaim.org/paul/css-linearization
> http://www.webaim.org/paul/css-linearization2
>


Actually though looking jumbled, this might be another way to put in the
navigation skip without having to code in the skippable links. These
would be heard last, and then if the screen readers or browser readers
read this order the same way.... if there are links in the content or
side box areas would those be hit in the screen reader order with the
tabbing key?

I am curious and will tab work with layers and divisions. I just tested
a page in IE and seems to work well however, same page in opera or even
older nn may not work well on keyboard tabbing of links on pages with
layers or z index.

would having the links in the top most layer matter, or make the
difference... or do these links have to be coded in another way?

Seems they may get trapped in some deliveries.

holly



----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/

From: Paul Bohman
Date: Tue, Feb 26 2002 8:12PM
Subject: RE: Accessibility Observations
← Previous message | Next message →

With CSS positioning, the tab order will be the same as the reading (or
listening) order. I added some links to my test files so that you can
see how the tab order changes when the div tags are rearranged. (Note:
the links are dummy links that don't go anywhere.)

The div tags work fine in Internet Explorer and Opera. In Netscape (both
4.x and 6.x) the particular kind of style that I used in these files
causes the keyboard accessibility to fail. This is a Netscape bug which
has been around for a while. The truth is that Netscape has never been
very keyboard-friendly. Most people who depend upon keyboard use will be
using a non-Netscape browser.

Here are the links to the test files again:
http://www.webaim.org/paul/css-linearization
http://www.webaim.org/paul/css-linearization2

Paul Bohman
Technology Coordinator
WebAIM (Web Accessibility in Mind)
www.webaim.org
Center for Persons with Disabilities
www.cpd.usu.edu
Utah State University
www.usu.edu

From: Mark Rew
Date: Wed, Feb 27 2002 5:32AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Observations
← Previous message | Next message →

Raleigh,

If you have an example of a page using CSS for multiple column layout in stead
of tables I would like to test accessing it with my Jaws 4.0. If you send me
a reference please include the url in the e-mail body.

thanks
Mark Rew
----- Original Message -----
From: "Raleigh Way" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
To: < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 5:43 PM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Observations


> Hi Peter,
>
> You have hit on something I don't know the answer to. I know what to
> expect if I design a Web page with columns much like a news paper.
> The newer screen readers are capable of reading down each column as
> intended. If I use CSS to create a visual layout of "boxed" text,
> how does a screen reader handle that? Let me explain a little
> further. If I use tables for layout, and I create, say 3 columns of
> text on the page, I know that newer SRs (screen readers) can navigate
> into and down each column. If I create the same visual layout, i.e.,
> "columns" using CSS, do the new screen readers treat the CSS boxes
> the same? I haven't tested this yet.
>
> Thanks for your input,
>
> Raleigh
>
> > > The answer I keep coming back to is
> >> linearity. I've surfed a lot of sites designed for people with
> >> disabilities, e.g., schools for the blind, and the one thing that I
> >> notice is that the sites are linear. By linear design, I mean
> >> left-to-right layout of text to accommodate older screen readers.
> >
> >You do realise you can use CSS to have linear design for screen readers and
> >all the boxes you like for visual browsers right?
> >Peter
> >
> >
> >----
> >To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
> >visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
>
>
> --
>
>
> ----
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
> visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
>
>


----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/

From: Peter Van Dijck
Date: Wed, Feb 27 2002 5:37AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Observations
← Previous message | Next message →

Try http://eleganthack.com/blog
Please let us know how it went :)
Peter

> If you have an example of a page using CSS for multiple column layout in
stead
> of tables I would like to test accessing it with my Jaws 4.0. If you send
me
> a reference please include the url in the e-mail body.


----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/

From: Mark Rew
Date: Wed, Feb 27 2002 6:26AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Observations
← Previous message | Next message →

Hi Peter,

I found the site straight forward and easy to navigate. To my screen reader
it appeared as one long list of links one under the other.

The one area of improvement I can see is additional skip navigation anchors or
accesskeys. Some quick examples:
Links to the archives by date or subject.
A link to either your e-mail or a place to submit comments.
A link to the list of articles most recently commented on.

I like the site and book-marked it so I can return to it. Also, keep in mind
that I only briefly looked at the site. You probably have navigation
assistance like I'm describing, but I did not take the time to find them yet.

Mark
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Van Dijck" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
To: < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 7:37 AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Observations


> Try http://eleganthack.com/blog
> Please let us know how it went :)
> Peter
>
> > If you have an example of a page using CSS for multiple column layout in
> stead
> > of tables I would like to test accessing it with my Jaws 4.0. If you send
> me
> > a reference please include the url in the e-mail body.
>
>
> ----
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
> visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
>
>


----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/

From: Peter Van Dijck
Date: Wed, Feb 27 2002 7:48AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Observations
← Previous message | Next message →

> You probably have navigation
> assistance like I'm describing, but I did not take the time to find them
yet.

It's not my site, but yes, they are there. I find this idea of increasing
the amount of skip anchors interesting, makes me think. thanks.
Peter


----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/

From: Philip Pawley
Date: Wed, Feb 27 2002 10:56AM
Subject: RE: Accessibility Observations
← Previous message | Next message →

Paul,

I have a few caveats to what you said about Netscape and Opera.

1. Netscape: recent releases of Mozilla do support keyboard focus *fully*, so presumably the next Netscape update will do so too. (Also, did you not say in an earlier post that the tab key works for you with Netscape 6.2 and Windows 2000?

2. Opera:
a. Your files work for Opera 5 but not for Opera 6.
b. Any page that includes a form fails to tab properly even with Opera 5: the form captures the keyboard focus and will not let go.
c. Even when it does work, the tabbing order is the order that appears on the page (not the HTML order). You can see that in your second file.
d. The "tabindex" attribute has no effect in Opera 5.

Sorry to be picky, but I think we can help each other by pointing out any gaps in each others' experience.

All the best,


At 26/02/02 20:12 -0700, you wrote:
>With CSS positioning, the tab order will be the same as the reading (or
>listening) order. I added some links to my test files so that you can
>see how the tab order changes when the div tags are rearranged. (Note:
>the links are dummy links that don't go anywhere.)
>
>The div tags work fine in Internet Explorer and Opera. In Netscape (both
>4.x and 6.x) the particular kind of style that I used in these files
>causes the keyboard accessibility to fail. This is a Netscape bug which
>has been around for a while. The truth is that Netscape has never been
>very keyboard-friendly. Most people who depend upon keyboard use will be
>using a non-Netscape browser.
>
>Here are the links to the test files again:
> http://www.webaim.org/paul/css-linearization
> http://www.webaim.org/paul/css-linearization2
>
>Paul Bohman
>Technology Coordinator
>WebAIM (Web Accessibility in Mind)
>www.webaim.org
>Center for Persons with Disabilities
>www.cpd.usu.edu
>Utah State University
>www.usu.edu
>
>
>
>
>

From: Paul Bohman
Date: Wed, Feb 27 2002 12:02PM
Subject: RE: Accessibility Observations
← Previous message | Next message →

Actually, let me clarify your clarifications.

1. Netscape: For the most part, Netscape 6 does tab well. The only
instance in which it does not (in my experience) is when the CSS
attribute "positioning: absolute" is used. The test page that I created
uses this CSS attribute. With other CSS attributes, Netscape 6 seems to
do very well. Hopefully they'll also support the "positioning: absolute"
keyboard access in future releases.

2. Opera: My test pages are fully keyboard-accessible. You just have to
be aware of the fact that Opera has different keyboard shortcuts. You
don't use the tab key to go from link to link in Opera. You use the "a"
key to go forward and the "q" key to go backward. So it is inaccurate to
talk about "tabbing" from link to link in Opera. The tab key in Opera is
used for navigating through forms rather than links.

Paul Bohman
Technology Coordinator
WebAIM (Web Accessibility in Mind)
www.webaim.org
Center for Persons with Disabilities
www.cpd.usu.edu
Utah State University
www.usu.edu

From: Peter Van Dijck
Date: Thu, Feb 28 2002 6:49AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Observations
← Previous message | Next message →

> How people use screen readers is an interesting question. In user tests I
> have found surprisingly little typical behaviour, even amongst experienced
> screen reader users.

I would like to get this discussion back to behaviour of people, and away
from behaviour of browsers (however interesting!). What strategies have
people observed here by people using disabled technologies to deal with the
web? Practical examples would be really useful, thanks.

Peter


----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/

From: Holly Marie
Date: Thu, Feb 28 2002 7:16AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Observations
← Previous message | Next message →

From: "Peter Van Dijck"


> > How people use screen readers is an interesting question. In user
tests I
> > have found surprisingly little typical behaviour, even amongst
experienced
> > screen reader users.
>
> I would like to get this discussion back to behaviour of people, and
away
> from behaviour of browsers (however interesting!). What strategies
have
> people observed here by people using disabled technologies to deal
with the
> web? Practical examples would be really useful, thanks.

Cerebral palsy - motor coordination difficulties - literacy -
communication difficulties
understands spoken directions or commands and others speaking.

tools
[1] Intellitools keyboard
[2] Audio prompts and cues, this person needs sound, voice, interactive
display of information
[3] Graphics are important, simple graphics are even more important
[4] While the keyboard has interchangeable templates for use, from
alphabet to QWERTY layout, to simple arrow keys , to yes no commands, or
enter quit, etc.... This user also does not have the ability to use a
mouse at all.
[5] Touch Window Screen overlay by www.edmark.com or Touch Monitor -
which makes drop downs and or dhtml style menus, near impossible for
access. Though scrollbars on browsers are workable. Just time consuming.
So pages on one window view might be more accessible, with a button
graphic link to advance to a next section or page.

This type of user makes great use of multimedia technology that also
fits the motor capabilities. This multimedia would include prompts and
cues, as well as spoken directions, information, and content. Multimedia
demos of how to showing or modeling activity, instructions, or
relationships of cause and effect would also be good on a delivery of
information for this user. So visual enhancements along with audial
enhancements of material are needed.

Here is just one user, and now by reading this, you can definitely see
the problems implementing some of the elements of design(function) and
usability might encounter.

Hearing impaired would need captions and text equivalents for all of
these methods, and so will blind, which may need even more heightened
descriptions on cause and effects and interaction or multimedia.

We could try and make the argument this user is not in a majority of
challenged users, but then you would be remiss at doing so. The
challenged population is not one group with same problems or
difficulties, and this is where it becomes very difficult to make any
sort of generalizations on what is needed to be done.

The list above is only some key items, I thought of, there are more for
this list I am sure. But it gives an idea of how some changes for one
group can greatly affect the usability and accessibility of another
group.

holly





----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/

From: Holly Marie
Date: Thu, Feb 28 2002 7:28AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Observations
← Previous message | Next message →

Another important item I left out of this list. Including motor
challenges the ability to use both hands does not exist... so
shortcut keys with a combination of two keys or more is not really very
viable. Yes I know there are sticky keys, however then the attn span and
frustration levels are a considerable issue.

Also the recall of such key combinations might be rather inconsistent.

I myself, working in so many software programs and browsers, cannot
recall all the keyboard shortcuts or many of them. So someone with some
comprehension or learning difficulties might be at a stronger
disadvantage.

Short cut keys do not work for everyone. Even if they are designed well.

holly





From: "Holly Marie>
> > > How people use screen readers is an interesting question. In user
> tests I
> > > have found surprisingly little typical behaviour, even amongst
> experienced
> > > screen reader users.
> >
> > I would like to get this discussion back to behaviour of people, and
> away
> > from behaviour of browsers (however interesting!). What strategies
> have
> > people observed here by people using disabled technologies to deal
> with the
> > web? Practical examples would be really useful, thanks.
>
> Cerebral palsy - motor coordination difficulties - literacy -
> communication difficulties
> understands spoken directions or commands and others speaking.
>
> tools
> [1] Intellitools keyboard
> [2] Audio prompts and cues, this person needs sound, voice,
interactive
> display of information
> [3] Graphics are important, simple graphics are even more important
> [4] While the keyboard has interchangeable templates for use, from
> alphabet to QWERTY layout, to simple arrow keys , to yes no commands,
or
> enter quit, etc.... This user also does not have the ability to use a
> mouse at all.
> [5] Touch Window Screen overlay by www.edmark.com or Touch Monitor -
> which makes drop downs and or dhtml style menus, near impossible for
> access. Though scrollbars on browsers are workable. Just time
consuming.
> So pages on one window view might be more accessible, with a button
> graphic link to advance to a next section or page.
>
> This type of user makes great use of multimedia technology that also
> fits the motor capabilities. This multimedia would include prompts and
> cues, as well as spoken directions, information, and content.
Multimedia
> demos of how to showing or modeling activity, instructions, or
> relationships of cause and effect would also be good on a delivery of
> information for this user. So visual enhancements along with audial
> enhancements of material are needed.
>
> Here is just one user, and now by reading this, you can definitely see
> the problems implementing some of the elements of design(function) and
> usability might encounter.
>
> Hearing impaired would need captions and text equivalents for all of
> these methods, and so will blind, which may need even more heightened
> descriptions on cause and effects and interaction or multimedia.
>
> We could try and make the argument this user is not in a majority of
> challenged users, but then you would be remiss at doing so. The
> challenged population is not one group with same problems or
> difficulties, and this is where it becomes very difficult to make any
> sort of generalizations on what is needed to be done.
>
> The list above is only some key items, I thought of, there are more
for
> this list I am sure. But it gives an idea of how some changes for one
> group can greatly affect the usability and accessibility of another
> group.
>
> holly
>
>
>
>
>
> ----
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
> visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
>
>



----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/

From: Peter Van Dijck
Date: Thu, Feb 28 2002 7:20AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Observations
← Previous message | Next message →

> Cerebral palsy - motor coordination difficulties - literacy -
> communication difficulties
> understands spoken directions or commands and others speaking.

That's interesting, thanks.
What types of activities does this particular person use the web for? What
sites does he/she visit? How long does he/she spend online? Email?
Thanks for any information. I'm trying to get a practical view of the
issues, not just theoretical lists. Actual stories would be even better.
Peter


----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/

From: Mark Rew
Date: Thu, Feb 28 2002 7:51AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Observations
← Previous message | Next message →

Peter,

This is interesting. Since you or someone in the discussion mentioned it, I
have been paying closer attention to how I navigate websites.

It is a combination of techniques often dependent on how well I already know
the lay out of the site. Usually when I connect to a site for the first time
I will let the screen reader speak everything on the page, at least until I
get an idea of where the information I'm interested in is located. If I have
been on the site before an generally know the navigation menus I will use the
"skip navigation" link to get to the content. If there is no "skip
navigation" link, I will stop the speech and quickly arrow down through the
links until I reach material I'm interested in. I have a feature that will
allow me to skip pass a group of links until there is a space or non-link
text. If I'm looking for a specific link that is near the beginning I will
stop the speech and tab to the link. If I know the link is some where within
a large number of lihks I will bring up a list of links and use the first
letter of the anchor text to jump to the link and click on it. Very seldom do
I just let the screen reader read everything on the page from beginning to
end.

I hope these descriptions are clear enough for a non-screen reader user to
follow. Something that seems to be confusing to my graphics developers, is
the idea that I perceive all of the links as one following another in a linear
form. Thus, using the arrow down will take me through the links even if they
are layed out left to right on the screen. It seems to me that the screen
reader is reading the anchor elements in the order that they appear in the
html code, not where they appear on the screen. I dislike pages that will
give you part of the text, some more links, and then more text. My hotmail
does this with the header information a list of options then the body of the
message. Some on line magazines do this too. To the sighted person it may
look like that the options are off to the side, but my screen reader does not
know this. I'm not sure that is really how they are layed out. In either
case it is easy for the eye to jump pass material that the person does not
want to read. Where as the screen reader must get over it either by reading
the material, scrolling pass it, or having a means of jumping to another
location on the page. In Jaws the Insert key wplus the enter key will skip
pass a list of links, but it takes time to position the fingers and execute
the command. It is just as fast to let the screen reader speak a short list
or arrow pass. Usually for my hotmail inbox I just let the screen reader
continue.

If anyone is really interested in how I navigate with the screen reader write
me offline and I will explain specifics.

Mark Rew

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Van Dijck" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
To: < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 8:49 AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Observations


>
>
> > How people use screen readers is an interesting question. In user tests I
> > have found surprisingly little typical behaviour, even amongst experienced
> > screen reader users.
>
> I would like to get this discussion back to behaviour of people, and away
> from behaviour of browsers (however interesting!). What strategies have
> people observed here by people using disabled technologies to deal with the
> web? Practical examples would be really useful, thanks.
>
> Peter
>
>
> ----
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
> visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/
>
>


----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/

From: Peter Van Dijck
Date: Thu, Feb 28 2002 7:57AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Observations
← Previous message | Next message →

Very interesting to hear about your experiences!! You can write me offline
at = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = with more details...
The email address this message comes from will be deleted today, so use
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = instead.

Do you mind if I publish these notes of yours on a site of mine
(http://liga1.com), and if it's ok for me to publish them, do you want your
name/email published? Thanks!
Peter


----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/

From: Jenny Craven
Date: Tue, Mar 05 2002 3:07AM
Subject: Accessibility research
← Previous message | No next message

I have been reading a number of list postings about accessibility
and user behaviour, and thought list members might be interested
in a research project I am working on at the Centre for Research in
Library and Information Management (CERLIM).

The project is called Non-Visual Access to the Digital Library and
is funded by the UK Council for Museums Archives and Libraries
(Resource). The main aim of the project is to develop further
understanding of user behaviour with web based resources, looking
in particular at how blind and visually impaired people approach
web based interfaces when looking for information.

The project included a user testing phase with 20 sighted and 20
visually impaired people. Sighted users were able to comfortably
read a standard size screen whereas visually impaired users
needed assistive technology, or had to be very close to the screen
to be able to 'read' it.

The users undertook the same four information seeking tasks using
four different electronic resources - a search engine, a library online
catalogue, an online directory of Internet resources and a
commercial web site. Each step of the process was logged (at
keystroke or equivalent level). As well as logging the information
seeking process, pre- and post-task questions were asked in order
to gather data of a more qualitative nature.

I am currently in the process of transcribing the data gathered,
which includes the mapping of each search task. The project is
due to end in June 2002, after which a final report will be made
available.

If you would like to find out more about the project then you can
visit the project website at:
http://www.cerlim.ac.uk/projects/nova.htm

I hope this information will be of interest
All the best
Jenny Craven
Research Fellow
CERLIM



**********************************************************************
Jenny Craven, Research Fellow
The Centre for Research in Library and Information Management (CERLIM)
Dept. Information and Communications
The Manchester Metropolitan University
Geoffrey Manton Building
Rosamond Street West
off Oxford Road
Manchester M15 6LL UK
Tel 0161 247 6142 Fax 0161 247 6979
Email = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Web: http://www.cerlim.ac.uk


----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/