E-mail List Archives

Search E-mail List Archives for

Number of posts in this thread: 10 (In chronological order)

From: Maxability Accessibility for all
Date: Mon, Aug 10 2015 5:51AM
Subject: Developers don't detect my screen reader
No previous message | Next message →

Hi all,

Recently when I am reading some articles on RWD, my mind was struck at
detecting devices for personalized experience. I thought Why cant
developers detect screen readers and provide the experience depending on
the SR used. On a bit of research I got different thoughts from various
people on the the concept. I have provided my thoughts here.
http://www.maxability.co.in/2015/08/developers-please-dont-detect-my-screen-reader/
Would like to know your thoughts too.

Thanks & Regards
Rakesh

From: Léonie Watson
Date: Mon, Aug 10 2015 8:18AM
Subject: Re: Developers don't detect my screen reader
← Previous message | Next message →

> From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
> On Behalf Of Maxability Accessibility for all
> Sent: 10 August 2015 12:51
> Recently when I am reading some articles on RWD, my mind was struck at
> detecting devices for personalized experience. I thought Why cant
> developers detect screen readers and provide the experience depending on
> the SR used. On a bit of research I got different thoughts from various people
> on the the concept. I have provided my thoughts here.
> http://www.maxability.co.in/2015/08/developers-please-dont-detect-my-
> screen-reader/
> Would like to know your thoughts too.

I find the idea of screen reader detection (or any other kind of AT detection) worrying. I wrote something about the reasons why back in February last year:
http://tink.uk/thoughts-on-screen-reader-detection/

Marco Zehe posted his thoughts on the subject around the same time:
https://www.marcozehe.de/2014/02/27/why-screen-reader-detection-on-the-web-is-a-bad-thing/

Léonie.

--
Senior accessibility engineer @PacielloGroup @leonieWatson

From: Moore,Michael (HHSC)
Date: Mon, Aug 10 2015 8:40AM
Subject: Re: Developers don't detect my screen reader
← Previous message | Next message →

In my opinion AT detection would pose several unacceptable risks. First is a privacy issue. Using automated AT detection is requiring someone to make a declaration of a disability without their consent. Would you find it acceptable to deploy something on your that would allow you to automatically detect the race, gender, sexual orientation or age of the site visitor and then make changes based upon those findings?

Second is a security risk. Reliably detecting what software is running on a system involves deeper penetration into the OS layer of the system to detect which process are running. Thus for an OS to allow this creates a dangerous security hole.

Best practice is to design a site that everyone can use. It will work better for everyone. I don't see any problem with allowing users to set preferences and customize the interface for themselves with the option of having those settings be persistent on subsequent site visits.

Mike Moore
Accessibility Coordinator
Texas Health and Human Services Commission
Civil Rights Office
(512) 438-3431 (Office)
(512) 574-0091 (Cell)

From: Jared Smith
Date: Mon, Aug 10 2015 9:02AM
Subject: Re: Developers don't detect my screen reader
← Previous message | Next message →

When training developers, we typically suggest three things to
consider on this topic:

1. Any effort spent on building and maintaining an alternative version
will almost always be greater than the effort required to make the
main version accessible.

2. Three primary measures of discrimination are separate, unequal, and
untimely. A "screen reader version" (or whatever), even if intended
for better accessibility, can easily meet some or all of these
measures. It's dangerous legal ground to be on.

3. Assistive technology detection isn't really possible anyway, so
don't consider it an option.

Jared

From: Eades, Terri
Date: Mon, Aug 10 2015 9:32AM
Subject: Re: Developers don't detect my screen reader
← Previous message | Next message →

As a web developer, I would also much rather have my one site accessible for all to reduce the number of websites I need to maintain. Even responsive design requires that you build 4+ designs at once, (at least in the very beginning), so then you'd be adding another when it can really be rolled into the design that's already there. You also run into the question if the "adapted" site has different content/functionality than the non-adapted one. A big concept of web accessibility is that the content for the disabled and non-disabled should be the same. (Think of it like a store. There's not a whole separate building just for wheelchair users. The main building has been adapted to serve all.)

Terri

From: Maxability Accessibility for all
Date: Mon, Aug 10 2015 9:35AM
Subject: Re: Developers don't detect my screen reader
← Previous message | Next message →

Hi Jared,
Thank you for the deep dive into the topic. Can you post the same on to the
blog article. One of my visitors have the same concern and I have responded
back similar to what you have said. Your illustration on the blog will add
value to the discussion there.
Here is the link to the article.
http://www.maxability.co.in/2015/08/developers-please-dont-detect-my-screen-reader/



On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 8:32 PM, Jared Smith < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:

> When training developers, we typically suggest three things to
> consider on this topic:
>
> 1. Any effort spent on building and maintaining an alternative version
> will almost always be greater than the effort required to make the
> main version accessible.
>
> 2. Three primary measures of discrimination are separate, unequal, and
> untimely. A "screen reader version" (or whatever), even if intended
> for better accessibility, can easily meet some or all of these
> measures. It's dangerous legal ground to be on.
>
> 3. Assistive technology detection isn't really possible anyway, so
> don't consider it an option.
>
> Jared
> > > > >

From: Mike Warner
Date: Mon, Aug 10 2015 12:21PM
Subject: Re: Developers don't detect my screen reader
← Previous message | Next message →

We ask up front via a hidden button whether a student is using a screen
reader, and use this data later to adjust settings to make our courses
easier for SR users to consume. There aren't many things that require a
setting change. Mainly, the video wmode needs to be set differently for a
screen reader to get at the controls. The current tech (jwplayer, screen
readers, browsers) may not need this any more, be we still do it anyway,
just in case.

Mike Warner
Director of IT Services
MindEdge, Inc.

From: deborah.kaplan
Date: Mon, Aug 10 2015 12:51PM
Subject: Re: Developers don't detect my screen reader
← Previous message | Next message →

On Mon, 10 Aug 2015, Mike Warner wrote:

> We ask up front via a hidden button whether a student is using a screen reader, and use this data later to adjust settings to make our courses easier for SR users to consume. There aren't many things that require a setting change. Mainly, the video wmode needs to be set differently for a screen reader to get at the controls.

There's a real danger to doing this, which is that many of the things screen reader users need are also needed by people who don't use screen readers and would never answer yes to that question. For example, controls that are available to screen readers are usually the only kind of controls which are available to keyboard and speech users. (Many people who prefer the keyboard over the mouse, whether for usability or for disability reasons, don't even think of themselves as disabled, or as users of adaptive technology.)

Perhaps your video player does not have this problem, but I have often found that the only version of a web app I can use is the one that asks "are you using a screen reader".

And of course, as everyone has said, maintaining the differences becomes a chore that is unlikely to be sustained as the members of development teams and design teams change over time. Thus the notorious Amazon Mobile/Accessible version, or Outlook for the Web Accessible Version, both of which are missing essential functionality of the non-accessible sites. In this case, you are only talking about different controls, not different sites -- but that still requires future developers, when you are not around anymore, thinking to set the modes differently.

Deborah Kaplan

From: Jennifer Sutton
Date: Mon, Aug 10 2015 1:43PM
Subject: Re: Developers don't detect my screen reader
← Previous message | Next message →

Speaking only personally, not professionally, and as a screen reader
user, for what it's worth, I ignore these kinds of hidden things and
*never* use them.
I view them as a signal that whoever has included them doesn't really
know about accessibility because they don't know how to make whatever it
is accessible.

Such hidden things reduce credibility for me, immediately. And as a
professional, I always strongly advocate against any such approach, for
all the reasons previously cited.

Frankly, I often see these things posted on sites with big names (I
won't name and shame), and they stay there for years. People can't see
them there, so they forget, or they think that that hidden thing has
absolved them of actually fixing the thing.

In short, a "hidden" link or button for screen reader users is a big
turn off to me.
Sorry to be so blunt, but experience teaches.

Best,
Jennifer

From: Mike Warner
Date: Tue, Aug 11 2015 12:10PM
Subject: Re: Developers don't detect my screen reader
← Previous message | No next message

Hi Deborah,

that's a valid concern. Everything in our course system is keyboard
accessible, however. We test all new features thoroughly for this. The
screen-reader-specific setting simply makes it easier for the SR tech to
get at the video controls. There used to be a problem with JAWS and the
default wmode video setting, where users couldn't get to the video
controls, and the wmode that was needed broke the video player for non-SR
users. I haven't tested it in a while to see whether it's still needed,
though.

Mike Warner
Director of IT Services
MindEdge, Inc.


> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2015 14:51:46 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> To: WebAIM Discussion List < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Developers don't detect my screen reader
> Message-ID: <alpine.WNT.2.00.1508101443080.31960@gratuity>
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
>
> On Mon, 10 Aug 2015, Mike Warner wrote:
>
> > We ask up front via a hidden button whether a student is using a screen
> reader, and use this data later to adjust settings to make our courses
> easier for SR users to consume. There aren't many things that require a
> setting change. Mainly, the video wmode needs to be set differently for a
> screen reader to get at the controls.
>
> There's a real danger to doing this, which is that many of the things
> screen reader users need are also needed by people who don't use screen
> readers and would never answer yes to that question. For example, controls
> that are available to screen readers are usually the only kind of controls
> which are available to keyboard and speech users. (Many people who prefer
> the keyboard over the mouse, whether for usability or for disability
> reasons, don't even think of themselves as disabled, or as users of
> adaptive technology.)
>
> Perhaps your video player does not have this problem, but I have often
> found that the only version of a web app I can use is the one that asks
> "are you using a screen reader".
>
> And of course, as everyone has said, maintaining the differences becomes a
> chore that is unlikely to be sustained as the members of development teams
> and design teams change over time. Thus the notorious Amazon
> Mobile/Accessible version, or Outlook for the Web Accessible Version, both
> of which are missing essential functionality of the non-accessible sites.
> In this case, you are only talking about different controls, not different
> sites -- but that still requires future developers, when you are not around
> anymore, thinking to set the modes differently.
>
> Deborah Kaplan
>
>
>