E-mail List Archives

Search E-mail List Archives for

Number of posts in this thread: 6 (In chronological order)

From: Sundby, Valorie
Date: Thu, Sep 25 2014 5:23PM
Subject: Google - Introduction to Web Accessibility
No previous message | Next message →

https://webaccessibility.withgoogle.com/course

I am not sure whether to applaud the effort or be snarky.

The banner text "Accessibility" has insufficient color contrast as does the URL displayed at the end of the video. Nice way to start a course about web accessibility for people with sight impairment.

Google and Accessibility: Will Google make a real commitment or just talk the talk?

Regards,

Valorie Sundby
Disability Services Specialist
Arapahoe Community College
5900 South Santa Fe Drive
Littleton, Colorado 80160-9002
303.797.5937
Fax 303.797.5810
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =

From: Olaf Drümmer
Date: Fri, Sep 26 2014 1:58AM
Subject: Re: Google - Introduction to Web Accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →

And Google should finally get rid of the yellow "o" in their logo, the contrast is definitely not sufficient…

Do you honestly believe sending a message along the lines of a sarcastic "Nice way to …" or ""… make a real commitment or just talk the talk" will do anybody any good? One thing is for sure - it would turn me away.You are beating up people who are already in the process of doing the right thing. Are they 100% there? Not yet, of course. Is the contrast for the gray text at the bottom too low? Absolutely! Just tell Google about it, and I am sure they'll fix it in the foreseeability future.

In general: I would try to be part of a solution, and not part of a problem!

Olaf



On 26 Sep 2014, at 01:23, "Sundby, Valorie" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:

> https://webaccessibility.withgoogle.com/course
>
> I am not sure whether to applaud the effort or be snarky.
>
> The banner text "Accessibility" has insufficient color contrast as does the URL displayed at the end of the video. Nice way to start a course about web accessibility for people with sight impairment.
>
> Google and Accessibility: Will Google make a real commitment or just talk the talk?
>
> Regards,
>
> Valorie Sundby
> Disability Services Specialist
> Arapahoe Community College
> 5900 South Santa Fe Drive
> Littleton, Colorado 80160-9002
> 303.797.5937
> Fax 303.797.5810
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > >

From: Jonathan H
Date: Fri, Sep 26 2014 2:20AM
Subject: Re: Google - Introduction to Web Accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →

On 26 September 2014 00:23, Sundby, Valorie < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:

> I am not sure whether to applaud the effort or be snarky.

Yes you are.

> Will Google make a real commitment or just talk the talk?

Well, having completed the course which is clearly and squarely aimed
at sighted web designers new to accessibility, how did YOU find it?

I mean, you DID complete the course before slagging it off, didn't you?

From: Mallory van Achterberg
Date: Fri, Sep 26 2014 6:47AM
Subject: Re: Google - Introduction to Web Accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →

I kinda wish they'd change the title a bit.

The intro text states clearly that this is visual accessibility
only. The title is way bigger though :P
We (the webdev community in general) already have the issue of
accessibility being equated to blind/vi visitors.

It's also a bit unfortunate (though probably understandable) that
they use this course to promote their own "screen reader", which
unlike what they say, is in many ways quite different from the
screen readers visitors will be using. I'd honestly rather they
encouraged devs to install NVDA. On the other hand, Google can
probably counter with "ChromeVox will be platform independent",
so they wouldn't need to list various screen readers per OS.
Also, most of the things they tell developers to test using
ChromeVox should be pretty similar to real screen readers, as
far as letting devs know that they've coded something well.

I'm assuming they totally skipped the usefulness of skip links
because Chrome and other Blink browsers still have that crappy
in-page-link bug since forever.
https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=262171
(don't be fooled by the date. This is from KHTML originally. Yeah)
Now there I'd totally be snarky-snark :P

On the other hand, learning to use the developer tools (which
I have and don't recall explicitly installing... or did I a very
long time ago?) is something I think is valuable to developers.
I remember the original Firebug and following a tutorial showing
how to set breakpoints and inspect Javascript with it. This took
me as a developer from using alerts for po'-man debugging to actually
learning how to debug. The Accessibility Developer Tools could
be a similar experience for other devs.

There's also a noted lack of nuance in the course (users are
crudely grouped into "cannot see at all and using a screen
reader" and "can see just fine but user keyboard"), but then,
this is meant for beginners.

It's also quite heavy on ARIA, but early on they do start out
with "use the right HTML elements" which is indeed the first
place a developer needs to start. It also has code examples of
things lots of devs actually make, like modal dialogs.

I think ultimately I'd recommend this course for fellow developers
who know absolutely zilch about web accessibility, with the loud
caveat that this is focussed on one, and not the most common,
disability.
I'm sure Google focussed on blind/low-vision partially because
many things a developer would do is very code-oriented. That
appeals to developers more than "writing text more simply" or
other things we need to do to follow WCAG guidelines.

> On 26 September 2014 00:23, Sundby, Valorie < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Will Google make a real commitment or just talk the talk?

On their own applications? Or Android? Not anytime soon.

But this is just edjumacational whatsits for developers, and in that
it seems to be well-made.

_mallory

From: John Hicks
Date: Fri, Sep 26 2014 7:21AM
Subject: Re: Google - Introduction to Web Accessibility
← Previous message | Next message →

On the greater subject of being a good faith promoter of accessibility, I
am not sure Google really fist the bill. Anybody have recent experience in
GWT (Google Widget Toolkit) ?

I was working on a few different apps that used it about 4 years ago and
there were consistent problems (accessibility oversights) built in to the
code!

Maybe it has been improved. But if not...

It's not about polemics, but waving the accessibilty flag does open you up
to justified scrutiny.



2014-09-26 14:47 GMT+02:00 Mallory van Achterberg < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
:

> I kinda wish they'd change the title a bit.
>
> The intro text states clearly that this is visual accessibility
> only. The title is way bigger though :P
> We (the webdev community in general) already have the issue of
> accessibility being equated to blind/vi visitors.
>
> It's also a bit unfortunate (though probably understandable) that
> they use this course to promote their own "screen reader", which
> unlike what they say, is in many ways quite different from the
> screen readers visitors will be using. I'd honestly rather they
> encouraged devs to install NVDA. On the other hand, Google can
> probably counter with "ChromeVox will be platform independent",
> so they wouldn't need to list various screen readers per OS.
> Also, most of the things they tell developers to test using
> ChromeVox should be pretty similar to real screen readers, as
> far as letting devs know that they've coded something well.
>
> I'm assuming they totally skipped the usefulness of skip links
> because Chrome and other Blink browsers still have that crappy
> in-page-link bug since forever.
> https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=262171
> (don't be fooled by the date. This is from KHTML originally. Yeah)
> Now there I'd totally be snarky-snark :P
>
> On the other hand, learning to use the developer tools (which
> I have and don't recall explicitly installing... or did I a very
> long time ago?) is something I think is valuable to developers.
> I remember the original Firebug and following a tutorial showing
> how to set breakpoints and inspect Javascript with it. This took
> me as a developer from using alerts for po'-man debugging to actually
> learning how to debug. The Accessibility Developer Tools could
> be a similar experience for other devs.
>
> There's also a noted lack of nuance in the course (users are
> crudely grouped into "cannot see at all and using a screen
> reader" and "can see just fine but user keyboard"), but then,
> this is meant for beginners.
>
> It's also quite heavy on ARIA, but early on they do start out
> with "use the right HTML elements" which is indeed the first
> place a developer needs to start. It also has code examples of
> things lots of devs actually make, like modal dialogs.
>
> I think ultimately I'd recommend this course for fellow developers
> who know absolutely zilch about web accessibility, with the loud
> caveat that this is focussed on one, and not the most common,
> disability.
> I'm sure Google focussed on blind/low-vision partially because
> many things a developer would do is very code-oriented. That
> appeals to developers more than "writing text more simply" or
> other things we need to do to follow WCAG guidelines.
>
> > On 26 September 2014 00:23, Sundby, Valorie < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> wrote:
> > Will Google make a real commitment or just talk the talk?
>
> On their own applications? Or Android? Not anytime soon.
>
> But this is just edjumacational whatsits for developers, and in that
> it seems to be well-made.
>
> _mallory
> > > >

From: Birkir R. Gunnarsson
Date: Sat, Sep 27 2014 7:35PM
Subject: Re: Google - Introduction to Web Accessibility
← Previous message | No next message

The color contrast SC (1.4.3) does not apply to Logos, so technically
they do not have to do anything about their logo from the
accessibility perspective.
But this is Google, they are teaching developers about accessibility,
and yet they fail to properly build accessibility into some of the
most widely used applications in the world.
I have no desire to just become a critic and a snarker, but I cannot
applaud Google for their efforts in the accessibility of their
online/web applications. My experiences reach from YouTube (why do
they not enable developers to specifically request the html5 embedded
YouTube player by default and have the Flash one always become a
keyboard trap) to the webkit skip links bug, to the way they
constantly change the Google Hangout interface, to the inaccessibility
of Google Docs and Google Sites. A few months ago I analyzed their use
of ARIA fot the html5 YouTube player and there was some systematic
misuse of it unfortunately.
AS a screen reader user (not using Chrome, sorry, but I cannot switch
my screen reader just when I am using Google),and as someone who does
accessibility audits and training on a daily basis, and see the
enormous efforts some fortune 500 companies are putting into the
accessibility of their web and moble presence, I am somewhat
frustrated, and at times downright hopeless, about Google and their
real accessibility commitment.
Recent updates to Android are making me a little more optimistic (they
are definitely headed in the right direction, unlike the web
accessibility in a certain other recent mobile O.S. update).

I really want Google to prove me dead wrong, and that hopefully in the
near future, but so far they have not done much to change my rather
synical view.
I hold Google to high standards. They are in a position to change the
lives of tens of millions of people with disabilities around the
world. They have all the resources to get it done easily, so I hope it
is just a matter of time before we see more of it happen.

Cheers
-B

On 9/26/14, John Hicks < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> On the greater subject of being a good faith promoter of accessibility, I
> am not sure Google really fist the bill. Anybody have recent experience in
> GWT (Google Widget Toolkit) ?
>
> I was working on a few different apps that used it about 4 years ago and
> there were consistent problems (accessibility oversights) built in to the
> code!
>
> Maybe it has been improved. But if not...
>
> It's not about polemics, but waving the accessibilty flag does open you up
> to justified scrutiny.
>
>
>
> 2014-09-26 14:47 GMT+02:00 Mallory van Achterberg
> < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> :
>
>> I kinda wish they'd change the title a bit.
>>
>> The intro text states clearly that this is visual accessibility
>> only. The title is way bigger though :P
>> We (the webdev community in general) already have the issue of
>> accessibility being equated to blind/vi visitors.
>>
>> It's also a bit unfortunate (though probably understandable) that
>> they use this course to promote their own "screen reader", which
>> unlike what they say, is in many ways quite different from the
>> screen readers visitors will be using. I'd honestly rather they
>> encouraged devs to install NVDA. On the other hand, Google can
>> probably counter with "ChromeVox will be platform independent",
>> so they wouldn't need to list various screen readers per OS.
>> Also, most of the things they tell developers to test using
>> ChromeVox should be pretty similar to real screen readers, as
>> far as letting devs know that they've coded something well.
>>
>> I'm assuming they totally skipped the usefulness of skip links
>> because Chrome and other Blink browsers still have that crappy
>> in-page-link bug since forever.
>> https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=262171
>> (don't be fooled by the date. This is from KHTML originally. Yeah)
>> Now there I'd totally be snarky-snark :P
>>
>> On the other hand, learning to use the developer tools (which
>> I have and don't recall explicitly installing... or did I a very
>> long time ago?) is something I think is valuable to developers.
>> I remember the original Firebug and following a tutorial showing
>> how to set breakpoints and inspect Javascript with it. This took
>> me as a developer from using alerts for po'-man debugging to actually
>> learning how to debug. The Accessibility Developer Tools could
>> be a similar experience for other devs.
>>
>> There's also a noted lack of nuance in the course (users are
>> crudely grouped into "cannot see at all and using a screen
>> reader" and "can see just fine but user keyboard"), but then,
>> this is meant for beginners.
>>
>> It's also quite heavy on ARIA, but early on they do start out
>> with "use the right HTML elements" which is indeed the first
>> place a developer needs to start. It also has code examples of
>> things lots of devs actually make, like modal dialogs.
>>
>> I think ultimately I'd recommend this course for fellow developers
>> who know absolutely zilch about web accessibility, with the loud
>> caveat that this is focussed on one, and not the most common,
>> disability.
>> I'm sure Google focussed on blind/low-vision partially because
>> many things a developer would do is very code-oriented. That
>> appeals to developers more than "writing text more simply" or
>> other things we need to do to follow WCAG guidelines.
>>
>> > On 26 September 2014 00:23, Sundby, Valorie
>> > < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>> wrote:
>> > Will Google make a real commitment or just talk the talk?
>>
>> On their own applications? Or Android? Not anytime soon.
>>
>> But this is just edjumacational whatsits for developers, and in that
>> it seems to be well-made.
>>
>> _mallory
>> >> >> >>
> > > >


--
Work hard. Have fun. Make history.