E-mail List Archives

Search E-mail List Archives for

Number of posts in this thread: 17 (In chronological order)

From: Bourne, Sarah (ITD)
Date: Wed, May 28 2014 10:39AM
Subject: Naming and labeling tables in Word
No previous message | Next message →

We are in the process of designing an introductory course for creating accessible Word documents, based primarily on the great training modules created by the State of Texas (http://gov.texas.gov/disabilities/accessibledocs) and cross-checking with the advice from Microsoft and Freedom Scientific. We have run into two situations where the Best Practice advice does not actually seem to do anything for JAWS users: giving a table a name, and identifying headers. Testing was done with Word 2010 and JAWS 15, and verified by a few of our most technically proficient JAWS users.

Table naming: The are two methods for assigning a name to a table in JAWS. One is using a Word caption, which adds a caption before the table. The other ("required" by Word's accessibility checker) is to add alternative text. However, neither method seems to actually be used by JAWS. The name isn't read when you enter the table, and it is not used when you call up a list of tables. The list of tables just gives the content of the first row and the table dimensions (e.g., 3 x 3). I have tried using ALT text title, ALT text description, Caption, and every combination of them, but there is no difference in the Table List. If you use captions, you can use Word's feature to create a clickable Table of Figures (tables in this case), but there doesn't seem to be a way of viewing them without actually inserting them.

Table headers: Using Word table properties, you can identify a row as column headers. Word table styles also allow you to also identify row headers. However, JAWS does not make use of either. You can only get it to read headers with the cell contents if you use the proprietary workaround of using Word Bookmarks that start with "Title", "ColumnTitle", or "RowTitle", or if you use JAWS verbosity settings to identify the header rows and/or columns yourself. That method works whether you have used the Word features to identify headers or not, by the way.

So that makes me wonder why we are asking people to do these extra steps at all.
1. Is there any other screen reader that does make of use of these semantic hooks Word allows?
2. Is it only so it will be tagged properly when you "save as" PDF?
3. Is there some setting we are missing in JAWS?
4. Are aliens from space are messing with our minds and it works for everybody else?

Freedom Scientific's help desk was no help. Any insight or experience you can share would be appreciated.

sb
Sarah E. Bourne
Director of Assistive Technology
Information Technology Division
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
1 Ashburton Pl. rm 1601 Boston MA 02108
617-626-4502
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = <mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
http://www.mass.gov/itd

From: Lucy Greco
Date: Wed, May 28 2014 10:59AM
Subject: Re: Naming and labeling tables in Word
← Previous message | Next message →

The only thing I can think to check is what is your jaws verbosity set to
I am finding to many times if you don't have jaws set to beginner it never
speaks the programmatic help such as this. If that does turn out to be
the case I have an open bug to add to about the topic

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

From: Jonathan Avila
Date: Wed, May 28 2014 11:06AM
Subject: Re: Naming and labeling tables in Word
← Previous message | Next message →

> 1. Is there any other screen reader that does make of use of these
semantic hooks Word allows?

You need to make sure the Defined Bookmarked Tables override verbosity
setting in JAWS is set to "off" for the bookmarks to be announced.

Jonathan

From: Whitney Quesenbery
Date: Wed, May 28 2014 12:32PM
Subject: Re: Naming and labeling tables in Word
← Previous message | Next message →

Sigh.
I sometimes (often informally) teach groups how to make Office docs
accessible.

The advice seems to come in three groups:

1. The majority is essentially: Use Word as it was intended to make a
correctly formatted document. I find myself saying this over and over
again for structure, styles, lists, columns, headings, etc.

2. There's a small group of "good practice things to do that are important
for screen readers and make the document ready for PDF" This includes
thinks like hyperlinks and tables and setting language.

3. There's an even smaller set of "things you have to change about how you
write" which I think just includes adding alt text, checking
color/contrast, and placing images inline.



My "sigh" list is:

1. If everyone did #1 and #2 as a matter of course, it wouldn't take more
than an inter-office memo to teach the additions for accessibility (#3).

I've even had companies ask me to teach accessible docs as a way to force
people to learn good document structure and plain language, since they
won't show up for those topics.

2. This stuff is so basic that I don't understand why we can't have
consistency across the applications. Please. Please. Please.

Maybe we can stop "innovating" long enough to get simple things right. So
that the screen readers can finally actually learn to read the file
formats. And so that the conversions between formats (Office to PDF and
Office to Web) will work correctly. They are just bugs as far as I can see.

Forget certifying people. Let's have certifications for file formats and
converters.





On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Jonathan Avila
< = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >wrote:

> > 1. Is there any other screen reader that does make of use of these
> semantic hooks Word allows?
>
> You need to make sure the Defined Bookmarked Tables override verbosity
> setting in JAWS is set to "off" for the bookmarks to be announced.
>
> Jonathan
>
>

From: Jonathan Metz
Date: Wed, May 28 2014 1:22PM
Subject: Re: Naming and labeling tables in Word
← Previous message | Next message →

Well put, Whitney.

Though I disagree with the suggestion to "Forget certifying people. Let's
have certifications for file formats and converters." We have those
certifications already, but all it shows is that some people are able
memorize what to do in certain circumstances for certain programs.

Making Office documents accessible is essentially providing documents with
the understanding that it's purpose should be for users who require
accessibility features of software that is able to edit/use docx/ xlsx/
pptx.

If you start to focus solely on making documents accessible only for AT,
you run the risk of inadvertently ignoring disabilities that don't
technically require AT, but may benefit from properly implemented
accessibility techniques. My recommendation would be to follow the
suggestion made by Bill Peterson of the DHS, which is to focus on
designing for standards, not for assistive technology (AT).

More reasons to avoid testing for AT:

' AT varies a lot – versions change regularly;
' Coding to a specific AT device is only as good as the version it's coded
to;
' Sophisticated AT devices like JAWS cheat;
' Just because an application works with JAWS does not mean it is 508
compliant;
' Jaws is an AT device, not a *measure of compliance* with 508 standards.



-Jon



On 5/28/14, 2:32 PM, "Whitney Quesenbery" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:

>Sigh.
>I sometimes (often informally) teach groups how to make Office docs
>accessible.
>
>The advice seems to come in three groups:
>
>1. The majority is essentially: Use Word as it was intended to make a
>correctly formatted document. I find myself saying this over and over
>again for structure, styles, lists, columns, headings, etc.
>
>2. There's a small group of "good practice things to do that are important
>for screen readers and make the document ready for PDF" This includes
>thinks like hyperlinks and tables and setting language.
>
>3. There's an even smaller set of "things you have to change about how you
>write" which I think just includes adding alt text, checking
>color/contrast, and placing images inline.
>
>
>
>My "sigh" list is:
>
>1. If everyone did #1 and #2 as a matter of course, it wouldn't take more
>than an inter-office memo to teach the additions for accessibility (#3).
>
>I've even had companies ask me to teach accessible docs as a way to force
>people to learn good document structure and plain language, since they
>won't show up for those topics.
>
>2. This stuff is so basic that I don't understand why we can't have
>consistency across the applications. Please. Please. Please.
>
>Maybe we can stop "innovating" long enough to get simple things right. So
>that the screen readers can finally actually learn to read the file
>formats. And so that the conversions between formats (Office to PDF and
>Office to Web) will work correctly. They are just bugs as far as I can
>see.
>
>Forget certifying people. Let's have certifications for file formats and
>converters.
>
>
>
>
>
>On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Jonathan Avila
>< = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >wrote:
>
>> > 1. Is there any other screen reader that does make of use of these
>> semantic hooks Word allows?
>>
>> You need to make sure the Defined Bookmarked Tables override verbosity
>> setting in JAWS is set to "off" for the bookmarks to be announced.
>>
>> Jonathan
>>
>>

From: Jonathan Avila
Date: Wed, May 28 2014 1:32PM
Subject: Re: Naming and labeling tables in Word
← Previous message | Next message →

[Jonathan wrote] If you start to focus solely on making documents accessible
only for AT, you run the risk of inadvertently ignoring disabilities that
don't technically require AT

Agreed. One big problem with the current MS Word format and possibly with
word processing formats in general is that there is no clear way to mark up
data tables. You can mark a header row but that's it. There are situations
where having an option such as the JAWS option to assign column or row
headers is effective and helpful to the user. One example is a teacher of
visually impaired who has an otherwise accessible Word document but needs to
prep the document for a young student to assist with JAWS automatically
speaking the headers as the user tabs through the table.

The above situation doesn't make the document compliant but it provides an
accommodation in a situation where a TVI might not know how to code in HTML
but can set bookmarks in a table. I think this is why we have these types
of options available -- as supports or accommodations in situations where
there are few other options.

Jonathan (Avila)

From: Bourne, Sarah (ITD)
Date: Wed, May 28 2014 2:22PM
Subject: Re: Naming and labeling tables in Word
← Previous message | Next message →

Lucy,

I don't find any change when I try with the different verbosity levels, but thank you for offering to include it in your bug report, had it turned out to be the problem.

sb
Sarah E. Bourne
Director of Assistive Technology
Information Technology Division
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
1 Ashburton Pl. rm 1601 Boston MA 02108
617-626-4502
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
http://www.mass.gov/itd

From: Bourne, Sarah (ITD)
Date: Wed, May 28 2014 2:28PM
Subject: Re: Naming and labeling tables in Word
← Previous message | Next message →

Jonathan,

Thank you for that tip. It didn't change the problem with the names of the tables, but it made a huge difference in how JAWS read, or didn't read, headers as you move around the cells.

sb
Sarah E. Bourne
Director of Assistive Technology
Information Technology Division
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
1 Ashburton Pl. rm 1601 Boston MA 02108
617-626-4502
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
http://www.mass.gov/itd

From: Whitney Quesenbery
Date: Wed, May 28 2014 7:06PM
Subject: Re: Naming and labeling tables in Word
← Previous message | Next message →

Jon,

Completely agree with you that usability evaluation - real people using
real tools to do real or realistic work is the way to evaluate for
accessible UX (or usable accessibility).

In usability we talk about getting the non-expert view. This doesn't mean
ranges of skills in using tools (though that is important as well). It
means seeing the web site or software from the perspective of someone who
is focused on the task or goal, rather than on evaluating the software.
Inevitably, we experts have a rich set of heuristics. That's generally
good, but too often this means that easy-to-detect problems get more air
play and we focus on technical correctness rather than a user-centered
view.

When the NCI/HHS Research-Based Guidelines were first published, each
guideline had two ratings:

1. The strength of the research evidence for the guideline. This score was
given based on a literature review.

2. The important of the guideline for usability. This score was given by a
panel of usability experts based on their usability testing experience.

One of the things that quickly became clear was that there were some
aspects of usability that were a little bit over-researched in comparison
to their impact on actual users. That didn't mean the guideline wasn't
important. Just that it was often easy to study and so had been studied a
lot. Conversely, there were guidelines judged to have a big impact on
usability for which there was very little academic research


Thinking about "certifying file converters" I was thinking about the kinds
of certifications that NIST creates for compilers and other tools. It's a
correctness and consistent application of the standards certification.
Nothing to do with users at all.




On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:22 PM, Jonathan Metz
< = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >wrote:

> Well put, Whitney.
>
> Though I disagree with the suggestion to "Forget certifying people. Let's
> have certifications for file formats and converters." We have those
> certifications already, but all it shows is that some people are able
> memorize what to do in certain circumstances for certain programs.
>
> Making Office documents accessible is essentially providing documents with
> the understanding that it's purpose should be for users who require
> accessibility features of software that is able to edit/use docx/ xlsx/
> pptx.
>
> If you start to focus solely on making documents accessible only for AT,
> you run the risk of inadvertently ignoring disabilities that don't
> technically require AT, but may benefit from properly implemented
> accessibility techniques. My recommendation would be to follow the
> suggestion made by Bill Peterson of the DHS, which is to focus on
> designing for standards, not for assistive technology (AT).
>
> More reasons to avoid testing for AT:
>
> ' AT varies a lot – versions change regularly;
> ' Coding to a specific AT device is only as good as the version it's coded
> to;
> ' Sophisticated AT devices like JAWS cheat;
> ' Just because an application works with JAWS does not mean it is 508
> compliant;
> ' Jaws is an AT device, not a *measure of compliance* with 508 standards.
>
>
>
> -Jon
>
>
>
> On 5/28/14, 2:32 PM, "Whitney Quesenbery" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>
> >Sigh.
> >I sometimes (often informally) teach groups how to make Office docs
> >accessible.
> >
> >The advice seems to come in three groups:
> >
> >1. The majority is essentially: Use Word as it was intended to make a
> >correctly formatted document. I find myself saying this over and over
> >again for structure, styles, lists, columns, headings, etc.
> >
> >2. There's a small group of "good practice things to do that are important
> >for screen readers and make the document ready for PDF" This includes
> >thinks like hyperlinks and tables and setting language.
> >
> >3. There's an even smaller set of "things you have to change about how you
> >write" which I think just includes adding alt text, checking
> >color/contrast, and placing images inline.
> >
> >
> >
> >My "sigh" list is:
> >
> >1. If everyone did #1 and #2 as a matter of course, it wouldn't take more
> >than an inter-office memo to teach the additions for accessibility (#3).
> >
> >I've even had companies ask me to teach accessible docs as a way to force
> >people to learn good document structure and plain language, since they
> >won't show up for those topics.
> >
> >2. This stuff is so basic that I don't understand why we can't have
> >consistency across the applications. Please. Please. Please.
> >
> >Maybe we can stop "innovating" long enough to get simple things right. So
> >that the screen readers can finally actually learn to read the file
> >formats. And so that the conversions between formats (Office to PDF and
> >Office to Web) will work correctly. They are just bugs as far as I can
> >see.
> >
> >Forget certifying people. Let's have certifications for file formats and
> >converters.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Jonathan Avila
> >< = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >wrote:
> >
> >> > 1. Is there any other screen reader that does make of use of these
> >> semantic hooks Word allows?
> >>
> >> You need to make sure the Defined Bookmarked Tables override verbosity
> >> setting in JAWS is set to "off" for the bookmarks to be announced.
> >>
> >> Jonathan
> >>
> >>

From: Liko, Todd
Date: Thu, May 29 2014 5:46AM
Subject: Re: Naming and labeling tables in Word
← Previous message | Next message →

I could not agree more about designing for standards and not testing for AT. I also think Whitney's comments were spot on.

With respect to the settings in Jaws, not being visually impaired, nor an expert with Jaws, when testing with Jaws, I am using the out of the box settings. I honestly cannot say how many users of Jaws customize the settings.

_______
Todd Liko
Communications Advisor | Conseiller en communications
Web Services | Services Web
Communications and Marketing | Communications et Marketing
427 Laurier Avenue West (AEAD), Ottawa ON K1A 0N5
427 Avenue Laurier Ouest (AEAD), Ottawa (Ontario) K1A 0N5
e-mail / courriel: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
telephone / téléphone: 613-949-9425 | fax / télécopieur: 613-949-2386
blackberry: 613-796-6375
Government of Canada | Gouvernement du Canada

From: Jonathan Avila
Date: Thu, May 29 2014 6:20AM
Subject: Re: Naming and labeling tables in Word
← Previous message | Next message →

> I could not agree more about designing for standards and not testing for
> AT

While we should NOT be testing for conformance to any assistive technology
we must keep in mind that WCAG conformance can only be met through
techniques that are accessibility supported. This means that any technical
implementation must be grounded in actual support in user agents and
assistive technology. You could have a site that is technically accessible
but functionally inaccessible with current assistive technology. Similarly,
Section 508 has similar technical and functional requirements in this
regard.

Jonathan

From: Karlen Communications
Date: Thu, May 29 2014 6:41AM
Subject: Re: Naming and labeling tables in Word
← Previous message | Next message →

On the other hand, if we have standards and the AT is not supporting those standards, we need to advocate for them to do so or we will be reading TXT format in 2050. We can't let the AT developers stagnate in support for document formats. I know there is a lot for them to cover in terms of functionality, however, if there are standards for document formats, they have a good set of functionality rules/techniques to follow.

We must create content to the format standards and, while we can use AT to do testing, it is the standards that provide more global access to all users and AT users.

Cheers, Karen

From: Jonathan Avila
Date: Thu, May 29 2014 6:52AM
Subject: Re: Naming and labeling tables in Word
← Previous message | Next message →

> if there are standards for document formats, they have a good set of
> functionality rules/techniques to follow.

This challenge is compounded by multiple issues including getting authoring
tools to implement the standards and expose the UI to allow for entry of the
necessary information, getting publishers, educators, and content creators
to use the appropriate authoring tool, training these people on the tool,
and ensuring the content is distributed in an accessible manner. In 2014 I
still see many primary, secondary, and post-secondary education materials
that are in formats that are completely inaccessible.

Jonathan

From: Karlen Communications
Date: Thu, May 29 2014 7:36AM
Subject: Re: Naming and labeling tables in Word
← Previous message | Next message →

I agree. And it is an area I'm working in. How to get the information about the standards to the legislators so that there isn't a disconnect between what we can do and what the lowest expectations of what we can do are. In many ways I feel we've been floundering for the past five or more years with no real progress in moving universal design and accessibility forward. We are still answering the same questions we were answering ten years ago...the same basic questions.

In some respect we are still so busy putting out these types of fires that we haven't been able to do more advocacy to the content application developers, digital environment developers, digital content developers and adaptive technology developers.

I also think the feeling of floundering has been the time it is taking for legislative refreshes in both Canada and the US, the HTML 5 issues of implementation and emerging file format standards like PDF/UA that are still not marketed or advocated for.

It is a partnership however it appears to be falling apart.

Cheers, Karen

From: Olaf Drümmer
Date: Thu, May 29 2014 11:53AM
Subject: Re: Naming and labeling tables in Word
← Previous message | Next message →

On 29 May 2014, at 14:20, Jonathan Avila < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:

> While we should NOT be testing for conformance to any assistive technology
> we must keep in mind that WCAG conformance can only be met through
> techniques that are accessibility supported.

In addition what others already stated around this aspect:

this is the biggest shortcoming in WCAG - it tends to create stagnation and to block innovation. This will improve only if either WCAG adjust their guidelines (everybody in the food chain must work against applicable standards), or we find a better set of guidelines that furthers rather than slows down much needed developments in the field of accessibility. WCAG is historically very valuable, but counter productive for the near and not so near future.


Olaf

From: Jonathan Avila
Date: Thu, May 29 2014 1:30PM
Subject: Re: Naming and labeling tables in Word
← Previous message | Next message →

> this is the biggest shortcoming in WCAG - it tends to create stagnation
and to block innovation. This will improve only if either WCAG adjust
their guidelines

This challenge isn't that much different than other industries. For
example, say I sell you a eco-friendly car that runs on a clean fuel --
but the fuel isn't sold anywhere. I'm claiming my car is affordable and
good for the environment but if the car doesn't move it's of no real use
other than for sitting in. A person wouldn't buy a vehicle without source
of energy -- just like an author shouldn't be able to claim a piece of
software is accessible even though it doesn't work with assistive
technology. There's clearly a balance between enough support to call
something accessible and requiring everything support it. I think the
authors of the WCAG conformance requirements left enough room in the
criteria to allow for this.

Jonathan

From: Bourne, Sarah (ITD)
Date: Tue, Jun 03 2014 6:44AM
Subject: Re: Naming and labeling tables in Word
← Previous message | No next message

A final follow up - we heard back from Freedom Scientific:
"Sorry for the delay in getting back to you [name deleted]. We have been extremely busy here the last couple of weeks! The behavior you describe is standard default behavior at this point in time, and I can verify that with document that you provided I am getting the same behavior as you. About the only thing I can suggest is that if it's okay with you, I can turn this in as an enhancement request for our developer team. I cannot promise that it will get done because that is up to the team, of course, but perhaps they may be interested in doing this or find it to be of use. If you would like me to do this just let me know and I'll turn it in as an enhancement request for a future version of JAWS."

We replied, yes, please, submit listing table captions instead of headers in JAWS's table list in Word as an "enhancement" request.

sb
Sarah E. Bourne
Director of Assistive Technology
Information Technology Division
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
1 Ashburton Pl. rm 1601 Boston MA 02108
617-626-4502
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = <mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
http://www.mass.gov/itd

From: Bourne, Sarah (ITD)
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2014 12:39 PM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: Naming and labeling tables in Word

We are in the process of designing an introductory course for creating accessible Word documents, based primarily on the great training modules created by the State of Texas (http://gov.texas.gov/disabilities/accessibledocs) and cross-checking with the advice from Microsoft and Freedom Scientific. We have run into two situations where the Best Practice advice does not actually seem to do anything for JAWS users: giving a table a name, and identifying headers. Testing was done with Word 2010 and JAWS 15, and verified by a few of our most technically proficient JAWS users.

Table naming: The are two methods for assigning a name to a table in JAWS. One is using a Word caption, which adds a caption before the table. The other ("required" by Word's accessibility checker) is to add alternative text. However, neither method seems to actually be used by JAWS. The name isn't read when you enter the table, and it is not used when you call up a list of tables. The list of tables just gives the content of the first row and the table dimensions (e.g., 3 x 3). I have tried using ALT text title, ALT text description, Caption, and every combination of them, but there is no difference in the Table List. If you use captions, you can use Word's feature to create a clickable Table of Figures (tables in this case), but there doesn't seem to be a way of viewing them without actually inserting them.

Table headers: Using Word table properties, you can identify a row as column headers. Word table styles also allow you to also identify row headers. However, JAWS does not make use of either. You can only get it to read headers with the cell contents if you use the proprietary workaround of using Word Bookmarks that start with "Title", "ColumnTitle", or "RowTitle", or if you use JAWS verbosity settings to identify the header rows and/or columns yourself. That method works whether you have used the Word features to identify headers or not, by the way.

So that makes me wonder why we are asking people to do these extra steps at all.
1. Is there any other screen reader that does make of use of these semantic hooks Word allows?
2. Is it only so it will be tagged properly when you "save as" PDF?
3. Is there some setting we are missing in JAWS?
4. Are aliens from space are messing with our minds and it works for everybody else?

Freedom Scientific's help desk was no help. Any insight or experience you can share would be appreciated.

sb
Sarah E. Bourne
Director of Assistive Technology
Information Technology Division
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
1 Ashburton Pl. rm 1601 Boston MA 02108
617-626-4502
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = <mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
http://www.mass.gov/itd