E-mail List Archives
Thread: Accessible map site?
Number of posts in this thread: 5 (In chronological order)
From: Austin, Darrel
Date: Fri, Feb 10 2006 3:15PM
Subject: Accessible map site?
No previous message | Next message →
On our new web site we're goig to have a locations directory and we want
to link addresses out to one of the map sites (google/yahoo/mapquest,
etc.) From an accessibility standpoint, is any one of those better than
the others? Granted, maybe maps aren't used a lot by those with vision
impairments, but I'm guessing some of the sites (like google) with their
addiction to Ajax could certainly cause issues with physically
navigating the page.
-Darrel
From: clamato
Date: Fri, Feb 10 2006 4:15PM
Subject: Re: Accessible map site?
← Previous message | Next message →
As far as I know, the main problem with Ajax is that it refreshes parts of the browser without any notification. On Google maps, more areas become visible only as the user scrolls the map (i.e. more "pieces" of the map are only downloaded upon request). This would certainly pose a problem a navigation problem.
Cheryl
>On our new web site we're goig to have a locations directory and we want
>to link addresses out to one of the map sites (google/yahoo/mapquest,
>etc.) From an accessibility standpoint, is any one of those better than
>the others? Granted, maybe maps aren't used a lot by those with vision
>impairments, but I'm guessing some of the sites (like google) with their
>addiction to Ajax could certainly cause issues with physically
>navigating the page.
>
>-Darrel
From: Jared Smith
Date: Fri, Feb 10 2006 4:30PM
Subject: Re: Accessible map site?
← Previous message | Next message →
Austin, Darrel wrote:
> On our new web site we're goig to have a locations directory and we want
> to link addresses out to one of the map sites (google/yahoo/mapquest,
> etc.) From an accessibility standpoint, is any one of those better than
> the others?
Google has the best maps (in my opinion) and a very clean, user-friendly
interface, but that darn AJAX thing to deal with. There's also the
JavaScript and user agent requirements.
Yahoo and Mapquest have better directions, but have ads, Flash, pop-ups,
and loads of things that will drive your users crazy. From a purely
standards-based perspective (alt text, form labels, and stuff), Mapquest
seems the best.
In short, take your pick of accessibility problems.
But I have to ask the question... if the maps themselves are useless to a
blind user, does the screen reader accessibility of the site that contains
them matter that much?
Jared Smith
WebAIM.org
From: Austin, Darrel
Date: Fri, Feb 10 2006 4:45PM
Subject: RE: Accessible map site?
← Previous message | Next message →
> But I have to ask the question... if the maps themselves are
> useless to a blind user, does the screen reader accessibility
> of the site that contains them matter that much?
No, probably not. But, of course, there are other accessibility issues
to be concerned with.
And, I suppose, a blind person may want to print the map to give to the
taxi driver or something (not that taxi drivers can read maps, but
that's another issue...)
In the grand scheme of things, I imagine a link off to a map site for
more direction information doesn't need to be at the top of our
accessibility priority list, but thought I'd ask in case one of the
options did rise to the top (and it seems that probably won't happen ;o)
-Darrel
From: Jared Smith
Date: Fri, Feb 10 2006 5:15PM
Subject: Re: Accessible map site?
← Previous message | No next message
Austin, Darrel wrote:
> No, probably not. But, of course, there are other accessibility issues
> to be concerned with.
Of course. And you can either choose ads, Flash, and pop-ups or AJAX as
the problems you want to be concerned with. There's probably something
better out there - I'm just not aware of it. Oh, and I just saw that
Mapquest is using AJAX, so add that to its list of problems.
I believe the technology is very close (meaning anywhere between tomorrow
and never) to allow at least partially accessible mapping applications. To
create accessible alternatives for graphical maps, you have to figure out
what the map is trying to tell you and then figure out a way to present
that textually. The major mapping applications (Google especially) are
very good at presenting maps and directions with just the information that
they assume will be most useful to the end user. They do this by giving
added importance to certain elements based upon location, zoom scale, etc.
Interstates have more importance than city streets and state names have
more importance than city names. All of this data is stored in databases.
Why then can't they present this same type of information textually? It
wouldn't be perfect, but it would be something.
I'm thinking something along the lines of, "Los Angeles International
Airport is located at 1 World Way in Los Angeles, CA 90045. It is .3 miles
west of Highway 1 (Sepulveda Blvd) on World Way. It is accessed by
Interstate 105 from the East via Interstate 405 Exit 87 from the North or
South." This is roughly the same general info you get from
http://tinyurl.com/cvdfg or http://tinyurl.com/bdbe6
If this could be done, it would be easy for the user to select more
details or less details. Anyways, it's just a thought.
Jared Smith
WebAIM.org