E-mail List Archives

Search E-mail List Archives for

Number of posts in this thread: 1 (In chronological order)

From: Joshue O Connor
Date: Tue, Nov 14 2006 4:00AM
Subject: Re: Now that IBM will no longer be supporting HPR
No previous message | No next message

I realise that not everyone would have access to testing with people
with disabilities and
a developer has to do the best they can with the resources that they
have at their disposal.

If it is possible, please do test with people with disabilities (contact
a local disability service, they
would be glad to help if they can) or if possible go for a dedicated
user testing facility, thought the later may not be an option.

Josh

Emma Duke-Williams wrote:
> I'm not sure what "problems that may not surface otherwise" Shane's
> talking about, but I find a screen reader useful for proof reading!
> We've got Read/Write though across the campus, so that makes that aspect easy.
>
> Emma
> On 11/13/06, Shane Anderson < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>> Hi Josh
>>
>> Sighted users who test with a screen reader should not do so as a
>> replacement to AT user testing but rather in addition to AT user testing.
>> Many developers who do have access to AT users for testing, also test with
>> screen readers or other AT devices. I test with several other tools not just
>> one accessibility evaluator. The reasoning is that you find different issues
>> when you look at things from a different angle. When I listen to a web site
>> with a screen reader (with the display turned off) I am able to recognize
>> problems that may not surface otherwise. It can be very helpful.
>>
>> Shane
>> WebAIM.org
>>
>>
>>
>> I don't know how wise it is for designers and developers, who are not
>>> normally screen reader users,
>>> to do their own testing with demo versions. I would suggest that a
>>> better approach for testing it to use real
>>> users of the assistive technology (AT), in order to get a clear picture
>>> of the accessibility and usability of what
>>> you are testing. I would argue that it can be counterproductive to
>>> develop a site and test it yourself when you are
>>> not familiar with the AT that you are testing with. I would hazard a
>>> guess that many users who are on this list
>>> who are testing with demo versions of JAWS are spending most of their
>>> time getting to grips with using the screen reader,
>>> rather than testing how well their site performs.
>>>
>>> I realise this post may annoy some people, but its better to track down
>>> some users of AT who are totally familiar with
>>> their devices and then let them test the site.
>>>
>>> That way the results will not be skewed.
>>>
>>> My two cents
>>>
>>> Josh
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>


********************************************************************

NOTICE: The information contained in this email and any attachments
is confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient you should not use, disclose, distribute or copy any of
the content of it or of any attachment; you are requested to notify
the sender immediately of your receipt of the email and then to
delete it and any attachments from your system.

NCBI endeavours to ensure that emails and any attachments generated
by its staff are free from viruses or other contaminants. However,
it cannot accept any responsibility for any such which are
transmitted. We therefore recommend you scan all attachments.

Please note that the statements and views expressed in this email
and any attachments are those of the author and do not necessarily
represent the views of NCBI


********************************************************************