E-mail List Archives
Thread: Screen reader support
Number of posts in this thread: 14 (In chronological order)
From: Kalpeshkumar Jain
Date: Tue, Apr 21 2020 5:23AM
Subject: Screen reader support
No previous message | Next message →
Hi All,
Is there any official statement or document which states that you should
support maximum or the least one screen reader?
I went through the W3 articles, however could not find any such artefact
validating the matter.
While it is wise to cover as much screen reader support as possible, even
if you support one, you would not attract any litigation.
Can anyone help me in finding any evidence for the above statement?
*Kalpeshkumar Jain*
Technical Lead - Mobile Application Development | LearningMate
This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and Disclaimer at
http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
--
This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and Disclaimer
at http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
<http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html>;
From: mhysnm1964@gmail.com
Date: Tue, Apr 21 2020 5:28AM
Subject: Re: Screen reader support
← Previous message | Next message →
Kalpeshkumar Jain
As far as I am aware, there is no legal or standard that states what screen reader or what number of screen readers or what versions you have to support. You have to consider your customers user base if you know it and should be a company policy. Also when testing web sites, using a single screen reader like VoiceOver for example. If a window screen reader user comes along, the site might not work correctly. AS the screen reader technology will work differently. From a QA point of view, this should be taking into account.
There are organisations which state what screen readers they have test their web sites against. In other words, the screen reader and web browser combination they support.
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > On Behalf Of Kalpeshkumar Jain via WebAIM-Forum
Sent: Tuesday, 21 April 2020 9:24 PM
To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Cc: Kalpeshkumar Jain < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Subject: [WebAIM] Screen reader support
Hi All,
Is there any official statement or document which states that you should support maximum or the least one screen reader?
I went through the W3 articles, however could not find any such artefact validating the matter.
While it is wise to cover as much screen reader support as possible, even if you support one, you would not attract any litigation.
Can anyone help me in finding any evidence for the above statement?
*Kalpeshkumar Jain*
Technical Lead - Mobile Application Development | LearningMate
This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and Disclaimer at http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
--
This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and Disclaimer at http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
<http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html>;
From: Dhananjay Bhole
Date: Tue, Apr 21 2020 5:49AM
Subject: Re: Screen reader support
← Previous message | Next message →
Hi Kalpesh,
Accessibility compliance doesn't mean only screen reader support.
Accessibility compliance for any products or services is beneficial
for all kinds of persons with disabilities. On the top of that it is
usable and accessible for persons with out any disabilities.
You should learn meaning of accessibility compliance first then you
will understand why any organization should adapt accessibility
compliance.
Please go through Business case for digital accessibility on W3c-wai.
www.w3.org ⺠WAI ⺠news ⺠business-case
Adapting accessibility compliance will help organization to avoid any
legal penalty is the only one of the benefits.
For more clarification you can call me on my contact number that you
will find in my signature line.
Regards
On 4/21/20, Kalpeshkumar Jain via WebAIM-Forum
< = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Hi All,
> Is there any official statement or document which states that you should
> support maximum or the least one screen reader?
> I went through the W3 articles, however could not find any such artefact
> validating the matter.
>
> While it is wise to cover as much screen reader support as possible, even
> if you support one, you would not attract any litigation.
>
> Can anyone help me in finding any evidence for the above statement?
>
>
> *Kalpeshkumar Jain*
>
> Technical Lead - Mobile Application Development | LearningMate
>
> This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and Disclaimer at
> http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
>
> --
>
>
> This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and Disclaimer
> at http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
> <http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html>;
>
>
> > > > >
--
Dhananjay Bhole,
Accessibility evangelist,
Cell: +919850123212
Website: http://www.sites.google.com/site/dhananjaybhole
From: Kalpeshkumar Jain
Date: Tue, Apr 21 2020 5:55AM
Subject: Re: Screen reader support
← Previous message | Next message →
I agree with your point, however it would increase the confidence if backed
up be an official record.
*Kalpeshkumar Jain*
Technical Lead - Mobile Application Development | LearningMate M: +91
8080294077 | Extn: 9476
This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and Disclaimer at
http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 4:58 PM < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Kalpeshkumar Jain
>
> As far as I am aware, there is no legal or standard that states what
> screen reader or what number of screen readers or what versions you have to
> support. You have to consider your customers user base if you know it and
> should be a company policy. Also when testing web sites, using a single
> screen reader like VoiceOver for example. If a window screen reader user
> comes along, the site might not work correctly. AS the screen reader
> technology will work differently. From a QA point of view, this should be
> taking into account.
>
> There are organisations which state what screen readers they have test
> their web sites against. In other words, the screen reader and web browser
> combination they support.
>
> Sean
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: WebAIM-Forum < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > On Behalf Of
> Kalpeshkumar Jain via WebAIM-Forum
> Sent: Tuesday, 21 April 2020 9:24 PM
> To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> Cc: Kalpeshkumar Jain < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> Subject: [WebAIM] Screen reader support
>
> Hi All,
> Is there any official statement or document which states that you should
> support maximum or the least one screen reader?
> I went through the W3 articles, however could not find any such artefact
> validating the matter.
>
> While it is wise to cover as much screen reader support as possible, even
> if you support one, you would not attract any litigation.
>
> Can anyone help me in finding any evidence for the above statement?
>
>
> *Kalpeshkumar Jain*
>
> Technical Lead - Mobile Application Development | LearningMate
>
> This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and Disclaimer at
> http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
>
> --
>
>
> This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and Disclaimer at
> http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
> <http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html>;
>
>
> > > at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> >
>
--
This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and Disclaimer
at http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
<http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html>;
From: Karlen Communications
Date: Tue, Apr 21 2020 5:57AM
Subject: Re: Screen reader support
← Previous message | Next message →
We can't make things accessible to one adaptive technology. Even if we were to say "this is JAWS conforming" we have no idea exactly what that means. Which version of JAWS, which browser, which version of the browser, which device, which user settings?
This is why we make digital content/applications accessible to international standards. We can test with screen readers, Text-to-Speech tools, voice recognition tools, alternate input devices to understand and confirm a level of accessibility but it is the international standard that provides the foundation for adaptive technologies to work with digital content/applications.
For example, JAWS 17 would not read Alt text for images in PDF documents or Word documents...that feature was broken until JAWS 18. Did that mean that all correctly tagged PDF or accessible Word documents read with JAWS were not "accessible"? No, the documents were tagged and created correctly and the Alt Text was present. Likewise, if someone uses Read Out Loud to test PDF, Read Out Loud only reads the entire document or the page and does not have the capability of accessing the more granular information like tables cells with column and row title information...it hasn't evolved since Acrobat 5 or 6 when it was introduced as an example of what someone might hear if they used a screen reader or Text-to-Speech tool. Does that mean that the PDF is not "accessible"? Not if it is tagged correctly and passes both an automated testing tool and a manual testing process.
Cheers, Karen
-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > On Behalf Of Kalpeshkumar Jain via WebAIM-Forum
Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2020 7:24 AM
To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Cc: Kalpeshkumar Jain < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Subject: [WebAIM] Screen reader support
Hi All,
Is there any official statement or document which states that you should support maximum or the least one screen reader?
I went through the W3 articles, however could not find any such artefact validating the matter.
While it is wise to cover as much screen reader support as possible, even if you support one, you would not attract any litigation.
Can anyone help me in finding any evidence for the above statement?
*Kalpeshkumar Jain*
Technical Lead - Mobile Application Development | LearningMate
This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and Disclaimer at http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
--
This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and Disclaimer at http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
<http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html>;
From: Kalpeshkumar Jain
Date: Tue, Apr 21 2020 5:58AM
Subject: Re: Screen reader support
← Previous message | Next message →
Hi Dhananjay,
I do believe accessibility is all about inclusivity.
I am well aware of the accessibility compliance and my question was
strictly limited to SR coverage.
*Kalpeshkumar Jain*
Technical Lead - Mobile Application Development | LearningMate
This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and Disclaimer at
http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 5:19 PM Dhananjay Bhole < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
wrote:
> Hi Kalpesh,
>
> Accessibility compliance doesn't mean only screen reader support.
> Accessibility compliance for any products or services is beneficial
> for all kinds of persons with disabilities. On the top of that it is
> usable and accessible for persons with out any disabilities.
>
> You should learn meaning of accessibility compliance first then you
> will understand why any organization should adapt accessibility
> compliance.
> Please go through Business case for digital accessibility on W3c-wai.
>
>
>
> www.w3.org ⺠WAI ⺠news ⺠business-case
>
> Adapting accessibility compliance will help organization to avoid any
> legal penalty is the only one of the benefits.
>
> For more clarification you can call me on my contact number that you
> will find in my signature line.
>
> Regards
>
> On 4/21/20, Kalpeshkumar Jain via WebAIM-Forum
> < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> > Hi All,
> > Is there any official statement or document which states that you should
> > support maximum or the least one screen reader?
> > I went through the W3 articles, however could not find any such artefact
> > validating the matter.
> >
> > While it is wise to cover as much screen reader support as possible, even
> > if you support one, you would not attract any litigation.
> >
> > Can anyone help me in finding any evidence for the above statement?
> >
> >
> > *Kalpeshkumar Jain*
> >
> > Technical Lead - Mobile Application Development | LearningMate
> >
> > This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and Disclaimer
> at
> > http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
> >
> > --
> >
> >
> > This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and Disclaimer
> > at http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
> > <http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html>;
> >
> >
> > > > > > > > > >
>
>
> --
> Dhananjay Bhole,
> Accessibility evangelist,
> Cell: +919850123212
> Website: http://www.sites.google.com/site/dhananjaybhole
>
--
This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and Disclaimer
at http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
<http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html>;
From: Paul Rayius
Date: Tue, Apr 21 2020 6:13AM
Subject: Re: Screen reader support
← Previous message | Next message →
Hi Kalpeshkumar,
You post a good, and valid, question regarding screen reader support. However, I don't think you're going to find what you're looking for in WCAG because WCAG 2.0 (and 2.1) are intended to be not technology specific.
In fact, to quote from the WCAG 2.1 Abstract (second paragraph), you'll read: "WCAG 2.1 success criteria are written as testable statements that are not technology-specific." Here's the URL, for more information, if you'd like. https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/
I'm sorry this isn't a better answer to the question that you're addressing but I hope maybe it at least helps to clarify why you can't find what you wanted.
Best wishes - keep arguing your case anyway, it's a worthwhile one, for sure!
Paul Rayius
Director of Training
CommonLook
-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > On Behalf Of Kalpeshkumar Jain via WebAIM-Forum
Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2020 7:59 AM
To: Dhananjay Bhole < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Cc: Kalpeshkumar Jain < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >; WebAIM Discussion List < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Screen reader support
Hi Dhananjay,
I do believe accessibility is all about inclusivity.
I am well aware of the accessibility compliance and my question was strictly limited to SR coverage.
*Kalpeshkumar Jain*
Technical Lead - Mobile Application Development | LearningMate
This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and Disclaimer at http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 5:19 PM Dhananjay Bhole < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
wrote:
> Hi Kalpesh,
>
> Accessibility compliance doesn't mean only screen reader support.
> Accessibility compliance for any products or services is beneficial
> for all kinds of persons with disabilities. On the top of that it is
> usable and accessible for persons with out any disabilities.
>
> You should learn meaning of accessibility compliance first then you
> will understand why any organization should adapt accessibility
> compliance.
> Please go through Business case for digital accessibility on W3c-wai.
>
>
>
> www.w3.org ⺠WAI ⺠news ⺠business-case
>
> Adapting accessibility compliance will help organization to avoid any
> legal penalty is the only one of the benefits.
>
> For more clarification you can call me on my contact number that you
> will find in my signature line.
>
> Regards
>
> On 4/21/20, Kalpeshkumar Jain via WebAIM-Forum
> < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> > Hi All,
> > Is there any official statement or document which states that you
> > should support maximum or the least one screen reader?
> > I went through the W3 articles, however could not find any such
> > artefact validating the matter.
> >
> > While it is wise to cover as much screen reader support as possible,
> > even if you support one, you would not attract any litigation.
> >
> > Can anyone help me in finding any evidence for the above statement?
> >
> >
> > *Kalpeshkumar Jain*
> >
> > Technical Lead - Mobile Application Development | LearningMate
> >
> > This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and
> > Disclaimer
> at
> > http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
> >
> > --
> >
> >
> > This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and
> > Disclaimer at http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
> > <http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html>;
> >
> >
> > > > > > archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> > > >
>
>
> --
> Dhananjay Bhole,
> Accessibility evangelist,
> Cell: +919850123212
> Website: http://www.sites.google.com/site/dhananjaybhole
>
--
This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and Disclaimer at http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
<http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html>;
From: Reinhard Stebner
Date: Tue, Apr 21 2020 6:22AM
Subject: Re: Screen reader support
← Previous message | Next message →
The closest you're going to get to this request is the WebAIM Screenwitter survey.
https://webaim.org/projects/screenreadersurvey8/
Sent from my iPhone
> On Apr 21, 2020, at 8:13 AM, Paul Rayius < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>
> Hi Kalpeshkumar,
> You post a good, and valid, question regarding screen reader support. However, I don't think you're going to find what you're looking for in WCAG because WCAG 2.0 (and 2.1) are intended to be not technology specific.
>
> In fact, to quote from the WCAG 2.1 Abstract (second paragraph), you'll read: "WCAG 2.1 success criteria are written as testable statements that are not technology-specific." Here's the URL, for more information, if you'd like. https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/
>
> I'm sorry this isn't a better answer to the question that you're addressing but I hope maybe it at least helps to clarify why you can't find what you wanted.
>
> Best wishes - keep arguing your case anyway, it's a worthwhile one, for sure!
>
> Paul Rayius
> Director of Training
> CommonLook
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: WebAIM-Forum < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > On Behalf Of Kalpeshkumar Jain via WebAIM-Forum
> Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2020 7:59 AM
> To: Dhananjay Bhole < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> Cc: Kalpeshkumar Jain < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >; WebAIM Discussion List < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Screen reader support
>
> Hi Dhananjay,
> I do believe accessibility is all about inclusivity.
> I am well aware of the accessibility compliance and my question was strictly limited to SR coverage.
>
>
> *Kalpeshkumar Jain*
>
> Technical Lead - Mobile Application Development | LearningMate
>
> This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and Disclaimer at http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
>
>
>> On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 5:19 PM Dhananjay Bhole < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Kalpesh,
>>
>> Accessibility compliance doesn't mean only screen reader support.
>> Accessibility compliance for any products or services is beneficial
>> for all kinds of persons with disabilities. On the top of that it is
>> usable and accessible for persons with out any disabilities.
>>
>> You should learn meaning of accessibility compliance first then you
>> will understand why any organization should adapt accessibility
>> compliance.
>> Please go through Business case for digital accessibility on W3c-wai.
>>
>>
>>
>> www.w3.org ⺠WAI ⺠news ⺠business-case
>>
>> Adapting accessibility compliance will help organization to avoid any
>> legal penalty is the only one of the benefits.
>>
>> For more clarification you can call me on my contact number that you
>> will find in my signature line.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>>> On 4/21/20, Kalpeshkumar Jain via WebAIM-Forum
>>> < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>> Is there any official statement or document which states that you
>>> should support maximum or the least one screen reader?
>>> I went through the W3 articles, however could not find any such
>>> artefact validating the matter.
>>>
>>> While it is wise to cover as much screen reader support as possible,
>>> even if you support one, you would not attract any litigation.
>>>
>>> Can anyone help me in finding any evidence for the above statement?
>>>
>>>
>>> *Kalpeshkumar Jain*
>>>
>>> Technical Lead - Mobile Application Development | LearningMate
>>>
>>> This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and
>>> Disclaimer
>> at
>>> http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>>
>>> This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and
>>> Disclaimer at http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
>>> <http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html>;
>>>
>>>
>>> >>> >>> archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
>>> >>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dhananjay Bhole,
>> Accessibility evangelist,
>> Cell: +919850123212
>> Website: http://www.sites.google.com/site/dhananjaybhole
>>
>
> --
>
>
> This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and Disclaimer at http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
> <http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html>;
>
>
> > > > > > >
From: Andrews, David B (DEED)
Date: Tue, Apr 21 2020 7:44AM
Subject: Re: Screen reader support
← Previous message | Next message →
As others have said, WCAG and other standards are designed to be technology agnostic. They are functional requirements -- you should be able to do X and Y no matter what assistive technology you are using.
Developers, and others want concrete definitions, you work with this screen reader version, and this browser, and you are done.
Unfortunately the world isn't that simple. In the end you just have to code to the standards and try and stay out of the rabbit hole of screen reader and version, browser and version, OS and version, etc.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > On Behalf Of Kalpeshkumar Jain via WebAIM-Forum
Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2020 6:24 AM
To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Cc: Kalpeshkumar Jain < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Subject: [WebAIM] Screen reader support
This message may be from an external email source.
Do not select links or open attachments unless verified. Report all suspicious emails to Minnesota IT Services Security Operations Center.
Hi All,
Is there any official statement or document which states that you should support maximum or the least one screen reader?
I went through the W3 articles, however could not find any such artefact validating the matter.
While it is wise to cover as much screen reader support as possible, even if you support one, you would not attract any litigation.
Can anyone help me in finding any evidence for the above statement?
*Kalpeshkumar Jain*
From: Jonathan Avila
Date: Tue, Apr 21 2020 8:14AM
Subject: Re: Screen reader support
← Previous message | Next message →
Checkout the Understanding Conformance document from WCAG 2.1 for accessibility supported.
https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/Understanding/conformance
Jonathan
-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > On Behalf Of = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2020 7:29 AM
To: 'WebAIM Discussion List' < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Screen reader support
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Kalpeshkumar Jain
As far as I am aware, there is no legal or standard that states what screen reader or what number of screen readers or what versions you have to support. You have to consider your customers user base if you know it and should be a company policy. Also when testing web sites, using a single screen reader like VoiceOver for example. If a window screen reader user comes along, the site might not work correctly. AS the screen reader technology will work differently. From a QA point of view, this should be taking into account.
There are organisations which state what screen readers they have test their web sites against. In other words, the screen reader and web browser combination they support.
Sean
-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > On Behalf Of Kalpeshkumar Jain via WebAIM-Forum
Sent: Tuesday, 21 April 2020 9:24 PM
To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
Cc: Kalpeshkumar Jain < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Subject: [WebAIM] Screen reader support
Hi All,
Is there any official statement or document which states that you should support maximum or the least one screen reader?
I went through the W3 articles, however could not find any such artefact validating the matter.
While it is wise to cover as much screen reader support as possible, even if you support one, you would not attract any litigation.
Can anyone help me in finding any evidence for the above statement?
*Kalpeshkumar Jain*
Technical Lead - Mobile Application Development | LearningMate
This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and Disclaimer at http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
--
This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and Disclaimer at http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
<http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html>;
From: Dhananjay Bhole
Date: Tue, Apr 21 2020 8:30AM
Subject: Re: Screen reader support
← Previous message | Next message →
Hello Kalpeshkumar,
Sorry! I have misinterpreted your quary as I quickly when through the mail text.
I also didn't find any explicit mention in any compliance document
about least number of screen readers support and specific versions.
However Several Digital Accessibility training documents have
recommended to provide support for at least 2 popular screen reader
and browsers combinations. Specially considering your targeted
audience. Whole objective is to provide accessibility to wider range
of users.
If you are providing SR support of at least 1 popular screen reader
in the consideration of the targeted users
and organizational policy, then I think there will not be fear of any
litigation.
I would suggest that instead of considering legal penalty,
organizations should consider that how their products and services can
reach up to large number of users so that they can increase their
customer base and earn more revenue.
Regards
On 4/21/20, Karlen Communications < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> We can't make things accessible to one adaptive technology. Even if we were
> to say "this is JAWS conforming" we have no idea exactly what that means.
> Which version of JAWS, which browser, which version of the browser, which
> device, which user settings?
>
> This is why we make digital content/applications accessible to international
> standards. We can test with screen readers, Text-to-Speech tools, voice
> recognition tools, alternate input devices to understand and confirm a level
> of accessibility but it is the international standard that provides the
> foundation for adaptive technologies to work with digital
> content/applications.
>
> For example, JAWS 17 would not read Alt text for images in PDF documents or
> Word documents...that feature was broken until JAWS 18. Did that mean that
> all correctly tagged PDF or accessible Word documents read with JAWS were
> not "accessible"? No, the documents were tagged and created correctly and
> the Alt Text was present. Likewise, if someone uses Read Out Loud to test
> PDF, Read Out Loud only reads the entire document or the page and does not
> have the capability of accessing the more granular information like tables
> cells with column and row title information...it hasn't evolved since
> Acrobat 5 or 6 when it was introduced as an example of what someone might
> hear if they used a screen reader or Text-to-Speech tool. Does that mean
> that the PDF is not "accessible"? Not if it is tagged correctly and passes
> both an automated testing tool and a manual testing process.
>
> Cheers, Karen
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: WebAIM-Forum < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > On Behalf Of
> Kalpeshkumar Jain via WebAIM-Forum
> Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2020 7:24 AM
> To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> Cc: Kalpeshkumar Jain < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> Subject: [WebAIM] Screen reader support
>
> Hi All,
> Is there any official statement or document which states that you should
> support maximum or the least one screen reader?
> I went through the W3 articles, however could not find any such artefact
> validating the matter.
>
> While it is wise to cover as much screen reader support as possible, even if
> you support one, you would not attract any litigation.
>
> Can anyone help me in finding any evidence for the above statement?
>
>
> *Kalpeshkumar Jain*
>
> Technical Lead - Mobile Application Development | LearningMate
>
> This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and Disclaimer at
> http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
>
> --
>
>
> This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and Disclaimer at
> http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
> <http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html>;
>
>
> > > http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> >
> > > > >
--
Dhananjay Bhole,
Accessibility evangelist,
Cell: +919850123212
Website: http://www.sites.google.com/site/dhananjaybhole
From: Birkir R. Gunnarsson
Date: Tue, Apr 21 2020 8:36AM
Subject: Re: Screen reader support
← Previous message | Next message →
Yeap, what Jonathan said.
Look at the "accessibility supported" conformance requirement for
WCAG, this is in addition to meeting the success criteria.
The defintion of "accessiblity supported" is pretty vague but
basically suggests you verify that your content is accessible with at
least one popular combination of a browser and an assistive technology
application, a screen reader is the logical choice.
Coding to standards should mean your page is 98% accessible, sadly
browsers and assistive technology vendors don't always uphold their
bargain in supporting content coded to standards.
I won't go on that rant here. ;)
If your page is plain and well coded you barely need to test with a
screen reader.
If your page contains complex or custom objects like tabs, menus,
custom date pickers, live regions and other complex scripted
components, this is where you need to test the page with at least one
screen reader/browser combo.
NVDA is the logical choice, because it is free, open source and does
very little second guessing so if there is a problem, you will notice
it (Jaws tries to fill in the blank, good for users bad for testers).
Use the WebAIM survey when deciding what combination to test with.
For mobile apps, just use the built-in screen reader and other
assistive technology features, at least the Zoom, on the device.
On 4/21/20, Jonathan Avila < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Checkout the Understanding Conformance document from WCAG 2.1 for
> accessibility supported.
> https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/Understanding/conformance
>
> Jonathan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: WebAIM-Forum < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > On Behalf Of
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2020 7:29 AM
> To: 'WebAIM Discussion List' < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Screen reader support
>
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not
> click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
> content is safe.
>
>
> Kalpeshkumar Jain
>
> As far as I am aware, there is no legal or standard that states what screen
> reader or what number of screen readers or what versions you have to
> support. You have to consider your customers user base if you know it and
> should be a company policy. Also when testing web sites, using a single
> screen reader like VoiceOver for example. If a window screen reader user
> comes along, the site might not work correctly. AS the screen reader
> technology will work differently. From a QA point of view, this should be
> taking into account.
>
> There are organisations which state what screen readers they have test their
> web sites against. In other words, the screen reader and web browser
> combination they support.
>
> Sean
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: WebAIM-Forum < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > On Behalf Of
> Kalpeshkumar Jain via WebAIM-Forum
> Sent: Tuesday, 21 April 2020 9:24 PM
> To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> Cc: Kalpeshkumar Jain < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> Subject: [WebAIM] Screen reader support
>
> Hi All,
> Is there any official statement or document which states that you should
> support maximum or the least one screen reader?
> I went through the W3 articles, however could not find any such artefact
> validating the matter.
>
> While it is wise to cover as much screen reader support as possible, even if
> you support one, you would not attract any litigation.
>
> Can anyone help me in finding any evidence for the above statement?
>
>
> *Kalpeshkumar Jain*
>
> Technical Lead - Mobile Application Development | LearningMate
>
> This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and Disclaimer at
> http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
>
> --
>
>
> This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and Disclaimer at
> http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
> <http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html>;
>
>
> > > http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> >
> > > http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> > > > > >
--
Work hard. Have fun. Make history.
From: glen walker
Date: Tue, Apr 21 2020 11:39PM
Subject: Re: Screen reader support
← Previous message | Next message →
This discussion is pretty much done but no one has mentioned an
accessibility statement. It's not exactly related to the original question
on minimum number of screen readers but accessibility statements often list
what kind of testing has been done and sometimes include a statement about
what combinations of screen readers and browsers work best for the website.
https://www.w3.org/WAI/planning/statements/
As mentioned, following the guidelines (WCAG) gives you the best
possibility that your site will be supported on the majority of assistive
technologies (not just screen readers). That's exactly what the Robust
principle is for, "Robust content is compatible with different browsers,
assistive technologies, and other user agents."
https://www.w3.org/WAI/fundamentals/accessibility-principles/#robust
One side note, the word compliance was tossed around a couple times. I
think most know the difference between compliance and conformance and it
might seem nuanced, but the difference is important. Compliance is
how well you adhere (regulatory) to accessibility *laws. *Conformance is
how well you adhere (voluntarily) to a set of *guidelines*. Jonathan
already posted the URL regarding understand conformance.
From: Kalpeshkumar Jain
Date: Wed, Apr 22 2020 12:14AM
Subject: Re: Screen reader support
← Previous message | No next message
Thank you everyone for sharing your perspective.
I am overwhelmed by the responses.
I will definitely go through the links for better understanding and this
will surely add to me knowledge.
I would mark the topic to be closed, but If anyone wants to share
their opinion please feel free to do so.
Thanks again for your support!
*Kalpeshkumar Jain*
Technical Lead - Mobile Application Development | LearningMate
This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and Disclaimer at
http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 11:09 AM glen walker < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> This discussion is pretty much done but no one has mentioned an
> accessibility statement. It's not exactly related to the original question
> on minimum number of screen readers but accessibility statements often list
> what kind of testing has been done and sometimes include a statement about
> what combinations of screen readers and browsers work best for the website.
>
> https://www.w3.org/WAI/planning/statements/
>
> As mentioned, following the guidelines (WCAG) gives you the best
> possibility that your site will be supported on the majority of assistive
> technologies (not just screen readers). That's exactly what the Robust
> principle is for, "Robust content is compatible with different browsers,
> assistive technologies, and other user agents."
>
> https://www.w3.org/WAI/fundamentals/accessibility-principles/#robust
>
> One side note, the word compliance was tossed around a couple times. I
> think most know the difference between compliance and conformance and it
> might seem nuanced, but the difference is important. Compliance is
> how well you adhere (regulatory) to accessibility *laws. *Conformance is
> how well you adhere (voluntarily) to a set of *guidelines*. Jonathan
> already posted the URL regarding understand conformance.
> > > > >
--
This mail is governed by the LearningMate Privacy Policy and Disclaimer
at http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html
<http://www.learningmate.com/disclaimer.html>;