[nfbcs] Inaccessible training, again

Sat Feb 16 21:42:07 UTC 2013

One problem that I see is that, both from the developer and user points of
view, we are tolerating much more sloppy coding and software, firmware and
hardware useability than we once did. There was a time when where I worked,
workstations would stay "up" for well over a year without a reboot or even
much tinkering. And problems such as memory leaks and other array boundary
problems were nonexistent. Why? Because neither we programmers nor the users
for whom we worked would tolerate it.

Sadly, I see nowhere near the expectations of perfection either among
developers or users today. This makes it tougher for all aspects of reliable
technology -- including accessibility.

Heck; we can't even get someone to solve some of our Windows 7 hangs. If I
had a winning Powerbal ticket. I'd *Love* to tell FS and GW Micro that the
firm that could solve these hangs in a week would get a guaranteed megabuck!
Since I haven't won, though, that isn't likely. (grin)

Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Tami Jarvis
Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2013 9:40 AM
To: NFB in Computer Science Mailing List
Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Inaccessible training, again

David,

I think you're on to something! I've been reading the thread with great 
interest, too, and scratching my head to come up with a useful thought 
on the subject... I think the legal angle is certainly useful when it 
can be brought to bear. However, the notion of communicating on the 
subject in a way that will engage the self-interest of employers and 
software producers alike also appeals to me.

Here is how I always presented things to my employers/clients when I was 
doing development still using my sight but learning the ins and outs of 
accessible design, at least in general. It seemed to make sense to them.

First, an application designed with accessibility in mind will also be a 
more usable application for all who use it. Thus, the small amount of 
extra time and attention at the outset will result in greater overall 
productivity, which is a plus to profits to begin with, especially over 
time. Furthermore, the lack of aggravation and headaches (literally) and 
so forth will be an improvement in health and morale of employees using 
the application, both of which result in even greater productivity.

Accessible code is well-formed code, or should be. If the developer 
takes that little extra time to plan how to build in the accessibility, 
and to do so with maximum efficiency, then the resulting code base is 
more likely to be well-organized and more free of gunk. Frankly, I also 
found that finding organizational workflow options to get around having 
to type all those extra little code blocks for accessibility inspired me 
to become much more efficient overall. /lol/ After about the first time 
I had to go back and re-do a bunch of coding because I left out the 
accessibility, I was super motivated! Building it in at first is almost 
no time and effort at all compared to going back to fix it later. /shudder/

The upshot is that the time and expense involved in future maintenance 
of the application is slashed hugely! Also, the developer with the 
well-formed code and efficient workflow looks like a total miracle 
worker, which never hurts. /grin/ You want me to totally change some 
major facet because you changed your mind and want it all to work 
another way? And you want that by Tuesday, then? Okay! Yawn. I'll just 
go out and stretch my legs, then come back and whip it out right now! 
/lol/ You want to add some humungous added feature, and you want it 
when??? Oh, okay! I'll get on that. Yawn. /lol/

As a developer, I also found that I got much more satisfaction from 
being able then to efficiently and quickly really make those 
applications shine and do backflips than in struggling through crappy 
coding habits... So what if the client/employer wanted a big change 
then? I could just do that, then get back to the next cool thing.

Well, now I seem to be rambling, trying to come at what I'm reaching for 
in terms of a framework for the communication process... Mostly, what 
I'm trying to say is that the accessibility angle can be presented in 
terms of benefit to the company and to the developers even. Sometimes 
the notion that it's worth the little extra up front to do more better 
overall is a bit hard to get across... But once you engage the client's 
self-interest, you can get somewhere. /smile/

Don't know how useful that is, but those are thoughts. /smile/

Tami

On 02/15/2013 05:17 PM, david hertweck wrote:
> I have read this thread for a long time and would like to share my
> thoughts.
> One of the things we all must realize as blind employees and consumers
> is that every company is out to make a profit.  As employees there is so
> much competition for jobs out there we must do at the very least as good
> of job or even better job than our sighted caleegs .  If it cost more to
> our employer to provide us with an accessible work environment than the
> profit the company will realize having us as employees, then there is no
> incentive for that company to higher us or provide an accessible work
> environment. Regardless of what the law states it is not in there best
> intrest.  I too have had many problems with accessibility .   I think
> one of the previous post hit on the right idea they stated:
>
> "Making a software package accessible for blind people is not only good
for
> us, its good for everyone. A package that is accessible is also much
> cleaner
> and better planned"
>
> The tack we as a blind work and consumer force should take is to show
> and prove how company's can turn a larger profit making things more
> accessible.
>
> What we should brain storm is ideas how making products more accessible
> can generate larger profits and cell these ideas to companies.  If these
> companies believe they will make more money then they all will be
> jumping on the accessibility bandwagon.
>
> What do you think?  Do you all have any ideas?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Steve Jacobson
> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 1:17 PM
> To: NFB in Computer Science Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Inaccessible training, again
>
> Mike,
>
> To some degree, I think legislation is part of the answer to force
> visibility and perhaps even to force some funds to be
> allocated.  However, I do agree with what you are saying that it is
> impossible to define well.  We had a bill here in Minnesota
> back in the late 90's and it was somewhat vague, but it resulted in
> visibility of the problem.  Of course, some legislatures and
> perhaps Congress would not have passed our bill because it was not
> specific enough, so that approach is probably not a universal
> answer.  Still, I think that affecting the market rather than trying to
> dictate to developers has a better chance of having an
> impact.
>
>
> Here is an aspect that I think we really need to try to understand
> better than we do.  There are accessibility issues that can and
> should be addressed more quickly by screen readers in a perfect world.
> JFW's OCR feature is an example of a technology that can
> help in some cases, and the capability has been there for a long time
> but nobody had tried it.  Sure, Freedom Scientific deserves
> credit for trying it now, but how much of our accessibility difficulties
> are solveable by screen readers if they had funding to do
> so?  I took a course on Wednesday that involved FLASH, and JFW,
> Window-Eyes, and NVDA all handled it differently.  Both Window-
> Eyes and JFW had problems with the course but each displayed parts of
> the course well that the other did not handle.  I suspect
> that both programs probably could make this course accessible if FLASH
> were more of a priority than it is.  Unfortunately, making
> FLASH work better is probably essential, but as a practical matter won't
> bring either screen reader more money than they will
> already get.  It isn't that I'm implying either of them is greedy.  The
> fact is that they can't afford to devote resources that
> cost them money to something that won't bring them a return and neglect
> something else that will bring them a return.  GW Micro
> and Freedom Scientific have had to spend considerable resources making
> their products work with Windows 8, Office 2010, and now
> Office 2013.  This is partly because
> Microsoft may have required that as a part of agreements, but also,
> whichever screen reader worked with the new versions would
> have had a
> let up on the other for people buying new computers so neither could
> afford not to.  I do not live in a fantasy world believing
> that everything will ever be accessible, but I think we're falling
> further and further behind.  I even see cases in some Microsoft
> products where both Window-Eyes and JFW are a little flaky, enough to
> make it harder for a new computer user to learn it.  When
> you read a PDF document, Adobe gives you three ways to have that
> document processed.  I am an experienced user, so I have some
> understanding of the options, but it is one more hurtle to new users.
> We're fortunate that they give us three options, but I
> wonder how pacient sighted users would be if they had to make these same
> choices when they read a PDF document.  These are small
> examples in that we can more or less work around them, but I see even
> within our accessible world that we're getting so many rough
> edges that it adds even a second layer to be dealt with by a new user
> beyond the layer added by screen readers.
>
> It just seems as though we have to do more than just complain and then
> give up.  If we get something passed, it is bound to have
> some positive impact even if it is not perfect.  If we don't get it
> passed but are seen as coming close, even that will help.  I'm
> all for finding something that would work better than this, but I don't
> know what it is.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Steve Jacobson
>
> On Thu, 14 Feb 2013 19:19:19 -0800, Mike Freeman wrote:
>
>> My difficulty is that I am rather skeptical that a truly effective access
>> technology bill can be written given the pace at which innovation
>> occurs and
>> new technologies are brought on-line. Accessibility (or rather, the lack
>> thereof) is one of those concepts that's kind of like that which the late
>> Supreme Court Justice Potter Stuart said about pornography: "I can't
>> define
>> it but I know it when I see it!".
>
>> Mike Freeman
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Larry Wayland
>> Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2013 6:57 PM
>> To: 'NFB in Computer Science Mailing List'
>> Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Inaccessible training, again
>
>> Gary, Yes I can. Let me find out the latest act number and I will send
>> you a
>> copy.  At one time it was Arkansas act 1227, but last year  there was
>> some
>> minor changes made to improve it and the act number changed.
>> What I have been watching this year are bill numbers so we will be
>> able to
>> attend the committee meeting to fight the changes these three senators
>> are
>> planning to make. So far a bill has not been submitted, as far as we can
>> tell.
>> By the way, I down loaded the sample bill in 1999 from the NFB web
>> site. My
>> rep followed that outline and wrote the bill that became act 1227 to fit
>> Arkansas. I don't know if that sample is still there are not.
>
>
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Gary Wunder
>> Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2013 9:56 AM
>> To: 'NFB in Computer Science Mailing List'
>> Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Inaccessible training, again
>
>> Larry, can you send us Arkansas's law? In Missouri we joint
>> Massachusetts in
>> a short-lived boycott of Microsoft products.  Our Dir. of information
>> technology in Missouri was incensed by Microsoft's indifference, but
>> he said
>> it was impractical for Missouri to do such a boycott if the federal
>> government and other states were not willing to be a part of it.
>
>> Warmly,
>
>> Gary
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Larry Wayland
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 6:52 PM
>> To: 'NFB in Computer Science Mailing List'
>> Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Inaccessible training, again
>
>> Arkansas, I have been told by people who should know has the strongest
>> law
>> in the nation for technology for blind and visually impaired people.
>> This
>> year Three Arkansas Senators have gotten together to try to change
>> that. We
>> are planning a big fight.
>> If blind and visually impaired people in other states could meet with
>> their
>> Representatives and pass state laws that are stronger than the federal
>> laws
>> these development companies would have to make their software and
>> hardware
>> accessible or not be able to sell it. It was hoped when the law was
>> passed
>> in Arkansas in 1999 other states would be able to follow suit  but for
>> whatever reason that has not happened.  We are really hoping we are
>> going to
>> be able to head off this attempt to weaken the Law.
>> Making a software package accessible for blind people is not only good
>> for
>> us, its good for everyone. A package that is accessible is also much
>> cleaner
>> and better planned.
>> Larry
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Gary Wunder
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 2:39 PM
>> To: 'NFB in Computer Science Mailing List'
>> Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Inaccessible training, again
>
>> I encourage you to do that. As a part of the ADA Accessibility Team,
>> perhaps
>> you have an affirmative obligation to do it. If we can't secure
>> accessible
>> software from the Federal Government, then Section 508 is a lie and we
>> might
>> as well figure that out sooner than later. What do you have to lose: you
>> have a stellar work record, plenty of seniority, and if they decide to
>> make
>> it tough on you, you can retire. How much better for you to do the heavy
>> lifting than the fellow trying to break into government service.
>
>> Warmly,
>
>> Gary
>
>
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Stanzel,
>> Susan -
>> FSA, Kansas City, MO
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 1:05 PM
>> To: NFB in Computer Science Mailing List
>> Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Inaccessible training, again
>
>> I sure wish I had some hints. It seems like Adobe should do more to make
>> flash accessible. On some of my courses they don't even use customary
>> keystrokes we all know. You can't do a list of links because nothing
>> looks
>> like a link. I'm not sure what I will do in my retirement, but I will not
>> mind leaving the daily struggle. As part of the section 508 team here
>> I am
>> really thinking of filing. At the moment I am just dreading my
>> struggle with
>> Pearson Vue to make the accommodations for a Java certification test.
>> Steve,
>> Curtis said you have had some dealings with them. Is that true?
>
>> Susie
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Tracy Carcione
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 12:28 PM
>> To: NFB in Computer Science Mailing List
>> Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Inaccessible training, again
>
>> I was thinking about something Steve said.  When there were actual human
>> instructors, I could get them to make things accessible, or at least
>> to try.
>> I think it's hard for one person to stand next to another and say, "No, I
>> don't care about your problems at all." And, if the trainer was
>> writing on
>> the board, I could ask him or a classmate what was written, usually.
>> What's
>> so frustrating about these online courses is that, not only are they
>> inaccessible, but I can't find anyone to talk to about it who has the
>> power
>> to do something about it. There's no accountability.
>> There doesn't even seem to be anyone who's remotely interested.
>> Tracy
>
>>> Tracy,
>>>
>>> Do you know what the software that is being used is called?  I am
>>> dealing with a similar problem here and getting nowhere.  I have had a
>>> couple of cases where the reason for the course was for me to just
>>> press a button to acknowledge I had read some documents that I had
>>> read, and the button was not at all accessible.  When I complained,
>>> reasonable accommodation was seen to be having a co-worker press the
>>> button for me.  That worked in the short run, but what about the long
>>> run?  I have had no luck getting the name of a contact outside of my
>>> employer which is what I really need to see what can be done.
>>> However, in my case, a good deal of the problem is with FLASH.  In one
>>> course, the problem was that all buttons that were used in the entire
>>> course remained visible to Window-Eyes, JFW and NVDA.  The TAB key
>>> even jumped to them.  However most would do nothing when pressed
>>> because they were not part of the current window.  There could easily
>>> have been 100 unlabeled buttons of which maybe five were active, and
>>> the others did not show visually.  I have another set of courses where
>>> I figured out that the button that goes to the next frame which has a
>>> label of "next" is identified as "Close" by screen readers.  This
>>> isn't a problem once I figured it out.  Some of my courses display PDF
>>> documents within the course but apparently provide their own
>>> inaccessible PDF viewer.  Sometimes I can get these documents
>>> separately once I find the person who wrote the course, but it all
>>> takes time away from my job.  In short, I'm with you completely but
>>> don't really know where to turn.  Adobe will tell us that FLASH can be
>>> made accessible and they have all kinds of information as to how to do
>>> it.  Developers will tell you that Adobe puts all of the burden on
>>> them.  Okay, so I'm venting, too.
>>> <smile>  In my case, most courses have been accessible for me where I
>>> work until the past couple of years, so I'm seeing the accessibility
>>> slipping away.  The problem is that nobody realized that what they had
>>> done was accessible because one doesn't complain about something when
>>> it works.  In the old days, when there were instructors for classes, I
>>> could often get by with taking careful notes and perhaps reading just
>>> a little from the material.
>>> I might just study a couple of diagrams with the Optacon.  However, we
>>> not only don't have instructors any longer, we are required to take
>>> many more courses, some for legal documentation purposes.  Some
>>> courses are such that I would have to get security clearance for a
>>> reader, and the workload is so unpredictable, it isn't a great
>>> solution, especially when this wouldn't have to be a problem.  Running
>>> into this kind of thing as well as the problems you and I have
>>> mentioned with respect to computer update screens, and even what I see
>>> as flakiness with screen readers in certain applications just gives
>>> one an uneasy feeling about our progress.  There has to be a way to
>>> put some pressure on some of these developers, and if we can get our
>>> TEACH act passed, it might help in that some of these developers
>>> probably develop some on-line courses for higher education.  However,
>>> in a large company, this kind of thing is very frustrating.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Steve Jacobson
>>>
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Steve Jacobson
>>>
>>> On Tue, 12 Feb 2013 11:36:54 -0500, Tracy Carcione wrote:
>>>
>>>> I was recently assigned some online training at work.  It's always
>>>> been inaccessible, but I thought I should give it a try and see if
>>>> somehow  they had changed things.  Nope, still inaccessible.
>>>> It's so frustrating, because it's almost accessible, except that there
>>>> are lots of unlabeled buttons, and, when they ask a question designed
>>>> to test my knowledge before moving on, it's displayed as a picture,
>>>> with no text.
>>>> At which point I'm stuck, and have to stop.
>>>> I've complained to Human Resources, to Training, and to some VP in
>>>> charge of web-based training.  I just left feedback on the site,
>>>> trying to explain the problem.  I really don't know what else to do.
>>>> If they  really want me to take this course, they'll have to assign
>>>> someone to sit with  me and do it, and the boss doesn't want to do
>>>> that.  So I get no training.
>>>> I'm not sure what I'd actually learn from the training, but I guess
>>>> I'll never know.
>>>> And to add insult to injury, right on top of the training website it
>>>> says "empowering people".  Well, not blind people.
>>>> I'm just venting my frustration, though if anyone has some idea, I'm
>>>> open to suggestions.
>>>> Tracy
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> nfbcs mailing list
>>>> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>> nfbcs:
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/steve.jacobson%40vi
>>>> si.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nfbcs mailing list
>>> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> nfbcs:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/carcione%40access.n
>>> et
>>>
>
>
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nfbcs mailing list
>> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> nfbcs:
>>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/susan.stanzel%40kcc.usda.
>>
>> gov
>
>
>
>
>
>> This electronic message contains information generated by the USDA solely
>> for the intended recipients. Any unauthorized interception of this
>> message
>> or the use or disclosure of the information it contains may violate
>> the law
>> and subject the violator to civil or criminal penalties. If you
>> believe you
>> have received this message in error, please notify the sender and
>> delete the
>> email immediately.
>
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nfbcs mailing list
>> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> nfbcs:
>>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/gwunder%40earthlink.net
>>
>
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nfbcs mailing list
>> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> nfbcs:
>>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/lhwayland%40sbcglobal.net
>>
>
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nfbcs mailing list
>> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> nfbcs:
>>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/gwunder%40earthlink.net
>>
>
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nfbcs mailing list
>> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> nfbcs:
>>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/lhwayland%40sbcglobal.net
>>
>
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nfbcs mailing list
>> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> nfbcs:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/k7uij%40panix.com
>
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nfbcs mailing list
>> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> nfbcs:
>>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/steve.jacobson%40visi.com
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfbcs mailing list
> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> nfbcs:
>
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/david.hertweck%40sbcgloba
l.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfbcs mailing list
> nfbcs at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> nfbcs:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/tami%40poodlemutt.com
>

_______________________________________________
nfbcs mailing list
nfbcs at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for nfbcs:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/k7uij%40panix.com