E-mail List Archives

Search E-mail List Archives for

Number of posts in this thread: 8 (In chronological order)

From: Swift, Daniel P.
Date: Fri, Oct 29 2021 7:48AM
Subject: Accessibility Tools for Website Visitors
No previous message | Next message →

Good morning, again!

Can anyone provide feedback on adding accessibility tools for website visitors? Specifically, I'm looking at what the website Mind Your Brain Foundation has done (https://www.mindyourbrainfoundation.org/). There is an icon on the right that allows users to change font size, contrast, etc.

I want to think that something like this would be beneficial, but I remember a few years back there was a negative connotation around sites providing "text only" versions of their site. I wasn't sure if something like this would elicit a similar response.

Thanks for the insight!

Daniel Swift, MBA
Senior Web Specialist
University Communications and Marketing
West Chester University
610.738.0589

From: Andrews, David B (DEED)
Date: Fri, Oct 29 2021 8:01AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Tools for Website Visitors
← Previous message | Next message →

For me as a screen reader user, the accessibility links are right at top. Personally I have no problem with this approach, it is clear. Right below is a list of four links, and they all say link link link link. There are other unlabeled links on page.

So, you put on a nice shirt, but have no pants!

Dave

From: Lucy GRECO
Date: Fri, Oct 29 2021 8:50AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Tools for Website Visitors
← Previous message | Next message →

personally i always tell people that providing things like this is
duplicating what the user should already have on their own device. and if
you do pt these on and they click one link on your site that takes them
away from you then what do they do self sufeshinsy is important to support
not bandaids like that lucy
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



On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 7:01 AM Andrews, David B (DEED) <
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:

> For me as a screen reader user, the accessibility links are right at top.
> Personally I have no problem with this approach, it is clear. Right below
> is a list of four links, and they all say link link link link. There are
> other unlabeled links on page.
>
> So, you put on a nice shirt, but have no pants!
>
> Dave
>
>
>
>

From: Mark Magennis
Date: Fri, Oct 29 2021 8:56AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Tools for Website Visitors
← Previous message | Next message →

There is a view that if someone needs larger text, high contrast, etc. to view a website then either they will already have it (e.g. by using some assistive technology that provides it) or they will never reach your site or use the web in the first place because this will be the only site on the web that is accessible to them. That's overstating it of course but it makes a valid point. However, anyone who has spent time with people with disabilities using the web or been such a person may realise that in practice many people struggle due to things like text size and contrast and don't have the tools or knowledge to fix these issues so they often welcome this type of functionality. Particularly, say, someone who has recently acquired a disability and want to access the site of a relevant service organization. They may struggle to get there but be pleased if it offers built in tools to ease the struggle, if only in that one silo. So it makes a lot of sense for an organization serving people with vision impairments for instance to have tools on its site that helps people make text and other content more visible to them if they don't yet have or know how to use general assistive technologies.

So my view is that although providing bespoke tools on every website is not the right approach, in principle there is nothing wrong with providing extra tools on specific websites that may help their specific users configure the site easily to better suit their needs and preferences. As long as these tools are easy to ignore and as long as they don't make changes that interfere with the tools (assistive technologies) those users might already be using.

There are some drawbacks though. The main one being that when a site has these tools, its easy for the developers, managers, future developers, or future managers to think that's job done for accessibility. It isn't of course but you do see that a lot. Sites that have accessibility overlay tools or read-out-loud tools on them and think they're now fully accessible. The basic site should be maximally accessible and these tools should just be thought of as tools to increase the diversity of needs and preferences that the site can serve.

Mark

From: Jerra Strong
Date: Fri, Oct 29 2021 8:58AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Tools for Website Visitors
← Previous message | Next message →

I think if you do too much of this, you run into overlay territory (
overlayfactsheet.com). And of course, you still have to make sure that if a
user brings their own adaptive strategy or AT, it still works with the
site.


On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 7:56 AM Mark Magennis < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
wrote:

> There is a view that if someone needs larger text, high contrast, etc. to
> view a website then either they will already have it (e.g. by using some
> assistive technology that provides it) or they will never reach your site
> or use the web in the first place because this will be the only site on the
> web that is accessible to them. That's overstating it of course but it
> makes a valid point. However, anyone who has spent time with people with
> disabilities using the web or been such a person may realise that in
> practice many people struggle due to things like text size and contrast and
> don't have the tools or knowledge to fix these issues so they often welcome
> this type of functionality. Particularly, say, someone who has recently
> acquired a disability and want to access the site of a relevant service
> organization. They may struggle to get there but be pleased if it offers
> built in tools to ease the struggle, if only in that one silo. So it makes
> a lot of sense for an organization serving people with vision impairments
> for instance to have tools on its site that helps people make text and
> other content more visible to them if they don't yet have or know how to
> use general assistive technologies.
>
> So my view is that although providing bespoke tools on every website is
> not the right approach, in principle there is nothing wrong with providing
> extra tools on specific websites that may help their specific users
> configure the site easily to better suit their needs and preferences. As
> long as these tools are easy to ignore and as long as they don't make
> changes that interfere with the tools (assistive technologies) those users
> might already be using.
>
> There are some drawbacks though. The main one being that when a site has
> these tools, its easy for the developers, managers, future developers, or
> future managers to think that's job done for accessibility. It isn't of
> course but you do see that a lot. Sites that have accessibility overlay
> tools or read-out-loud tools on them and think they're now fully
> accessible. The basic site should be maximally accessible and these tools
> should just be thought of as tools to increase the diversity of needs and
> preferences that the site can serve.
>
> Mark
>
>

From: L Snider
Date: Fri, Oct 29 2021 10:14AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Tools for Website Visitors
← Previous message | Next message →

One thing I have noticed, and this is just my experience. Most sites that I
have gone on that use these kinds of widgets are not that accessible for
the site itself-as Jerra noted they can become overlays. I was just on a
virtual conference and they had an amazing widget, but the headings were
terrible (and I go beyond WCAG for many things, so the headings weren't the
only potential barrier I have noted).

Cheers

Lisa

On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 10:49 AM Swift, Daniel P. < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:

> Good morning, again!
>
> Can anyone provide feedback on adding accessibility tools for website
> visitors? Specifically, I'm looking at what the website Mind Your Brain
> Foundation has done (https://www.mindyourbrainfoundation.org/). There is
> an icon on the right that allows users to change font size, contrast, etc.
>
> I want to think that something like this would be beneficial, but I
> remember a few years back there was a negative connotation around sites
> providing "text only" versions of their site. I wasn't sure if something
> like this would elicit a similar response.
>
> Thanks for the insight!
>
> Daniel Swift, MBA
> Senior Web Specialist
> University Communications and Marketing
> West Chester University
> 610.738.0589
>
> > > > >

From: wolfgang.berndorfer
Date: Sat, Oct 30 2021 9:37AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Tools for Website Visitors
← Previous message | Next message →

My three thoughts:

1. Priority for Conformance with WCAG AA
Too often I find such features on sites that lack accessibility basics.
Marking up a change of contrast or font styling as LINK and not button e.g., is a violation of SC 4.1.2.

2. Positioning Accessibility Features
If a website provides A11Y features, they should be visually and technically (focus order) on top.
It's very frustrating, when you realize somewhere in between or behind that you could have gotten it easier.

3. Nesting Icon
If the A11Y features are available by a button for a popup:
There is no standard for the icon image, but it seems that the person with spreading arms and legs gets common.
Optimally the icon is associated with a visual text like ‘Accessibility'.

Wolfgang

From: Swift, Daniel P.
Date: Mon, Nov 01 2021 7:34AM
Subject: Re: Accessibility Tools for Website Visitors
← Previous message | No next message

This is all great information. Thanks everyone for your feedback!

Daniel Swift, MBA
Senior Web Specialist
University Communications and Marketing
West Chester University
610.738.0589

From: WebAIM-Forum < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > On Behalf Of Jerra Strong
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2021 10:58 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] [EXTERNAL] Accessibility Tools for Website Visitors

I think if you do too much of this, you run into overlay territory (
overlayfactsheet.com). And of course, you still have to make sure that if a
user brings their own adaptive strategy or AT, it still works with the
site.


On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 7:56 AM Mark Magennis < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = <mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >>
wrote:

> There is a view that if someone needs larger text, high contrast, etc. to
> view a website then either they will already have it (e.g. by using some
> assistive technology that provides it) or they will never reach your site
> or use the web in the first place because this will be the only site on the
> web that is accessible to them. That's overstating it of course but it
> makes a valid point. However, anyone who has spent time with people with
> disabilities using the web or been such a person may realise that in
> practice many people struggle due to things like text size and contrast and
> don't have the tools or knowledge to fix these issues so they often welcome
> this type of functionality. Particularly, say, someone who has recently
> acquired a disability and want to access the site of a relevant service
> organization. They may struggle to get there but be pleased if it offers
> built in tools to ease the struggle, if only in that one silo. So it makes
> a lot of sense for an organization serving people with vision impairments
> for instance to have tools on its site that helps people make text and
> other content more visible to them if they don't yet have or know how to
> use general assistive technologies.
>
> So my view is that although providing bespoke tools on every website is
> not the right approach, in principle there is nothing wrong with providing
> extra tools on specific websites that may help their specific users
> configure the site easily to better suit their needs and preferences. As
> long as these tools are easy to ignore and as long as they don't make
> changes that interfere with the tools (assistive technologies) those users
> might already be using.
>
> There are some drawbacks though. The main one being that when a site has
> these tools, its easy for the developers, managers, future developers, or
> future managers to think that's job done for accessibility. It isn't of
> course but you do see that a lot. Sites that have accessibility overlay
> tools or read-out-loud tools on them and think they're now fully
> accessible. The basic site should be maximally accessible and these tools
> should just be thought of as tools to increase the diversity of needs and
> preferences that the site can serve.
>
> Mark
>
>