[nfbcs] Ethics of screen reader friendly development

Jim Barbour jbar at barcore.com
Mon May 20 22:28:42 UTC 2013 

Hey John,

You say that I'm making out screen reader usability out to be harder
than facilities based (wheelchair) accessibility.  You say that in
both cases all that is require is effort.

I believe the skill level and attention to detail required of the
applications architect building accessible screen applications is
significantly greater than that of the facilities architect who is
designing accessible buildings.

Your pointing out Amazon as an example is interesting, since that work
is now done.  I'll point out that the effort amazon put into making the
kindle voice over aware was effort that could have gone into adding
other features that would have benefitted a larger audience.  Mike's
original question of ethics comes starkly into view here.  Do we have
the right to demand that Amazon build voiceover awareness into the
kindle app, for free no less, costing others whatever features could have
been done instead.

In this case, I say that this was very ethical because the
kindle is being sold to public institutions which means those
institutions buying the kindle were in violation of section 508.

Jim

On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 12:46:11PM -0500, John G. Heim wrote:
> First of all, you are disputing a point I never made. I never said that accessibility is easy. To some degree, it's immaterial to my point because it's a matter of doing as much as we can within reason. After all, it wasn't easy to make our physical infrastructure wheelchair accessible. 
> 
> But besides that, accessibility  is not as hard as you make it out to be. It's really not that different from wheelchair accessibility in that absolute perfection is difficult if not impossible. But the problem itself can essentially be eliminated with some effort. If our society put the same amount of attention and effort into electronic accessibility for screen readers as it put into physical accessibility for wheelchairs, the problem could be essentially solved.
> 
> Probably the best example of this was the NFB's lawsuit against the universities that were going to give all their students the Kindle book reader even though it wasn't accessible. Asking Amazon to put a workable screen reader on it's device was not asking for the moon. Apple's IOS devices all come with a screen reader and there are several screen readers developed completely by volunteers in their spare time. If they can do it, Amazon, with it's vast resources could have done the same. If you compare what we were asking from Amazon to the huge amount of resources put into making our physical infrastructure wheelchair accessible, there's no contest. We weren't asking for anything tougher for Amazon than we had asked of the thousands upon thousands of businesses that had built or remodeled a brick and mortar structure over the past couple of decades since the ADA was passed. 
> 
> PS: I don't understand how the distinction I'm making between legal and ethical issues can cause so much confusion. The point I'm making isn't about the specifics of accessibility laws but about whether such laws should exist at all. Some people seem to think it's wrong to legislate accessibility. That's an ethical issue, not a legal one. 
> 
> The NFB's Kindle lawsuit is again a good example. It should be fairly obvious to anyone that you could criticize the NFB's actions on either legal or on ethical grounds. Regardless of the legal merits of the case, was it ethical and/or fair for the NFB to keep all those students from getting Kindles just because they were inaccessible to a few? My answer, of course, is absolutely yes. My opinion is that it would have been unethical for the NFB to not file suit. I'd say it was unethical for the universities to be willing to leave blind students out like that.
> 
> Actually, the only reasonable way to criticize my argument is to say that the huge amount of resources we put into making our country wheelchair accessible wasn't worth it. The benefit from doing that wasn't worth the cost.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Jan 30, 2008, at 10:13 AM, pblackmer27 at gmail.com wrote:
> 
> > 
> > 
> > -original message-
> > Subject: [nfbcs] Ethics of screen reader friendly development
> > From: Jim Barbour <jbar at barcore.com>
> > Date: 05/13/2013 10:15 AM
> > 
> > John, I'm afraid you've managed to muddle this conversation
> > considerably by blurring the lines between ethical and legal.
> > 
> > Of course our society prefers that people be nice to each other and
> > help out when possible.  However, our legal system doesn't require
> > it because there are times when help is unwanted, or too much of a
> > burden for the helper.   
> > 
> > As for the ethics of accessibility, it really is hard to pin down.  One
> > reason it's so hard is that accessibility for blind folks doesn't have
> > good requirements.  We talk a lot about something being usable by the
> > blind, but what a blind person can use will depend largely on the
> > blind person.
> > 
> > There are guidelines, WCAG and others, but nothing a software engineer
> > can mark off pn a checklist.  In order to get real accessibility, a
> > software developer must be aware of all the technology that blind
> > people use, code for those technologies, stage a user group of blind
> > folks for testing, and then document and support the accessible
> > version of the software.
> > 
> > Imagine if we had the same lack of requirements for other types of
> > accessibility such as closed captioning or wheelchair ramps.  My guess
> > is we'd have much less of those types of accessibility as well.
> > 
> > Finally, to Mike's point, whether we like to admit it or not we are
> > holding back new innovations in order to make or keep products
> > accessible for us.  My favorite example of this today is IOS and
> > voiceover. Newer IOS apps have started using new gestures to access
> > functions. However, since voiceover isn't aware of these new gestures,
> > how could it be, these apps are not voiceover friendly.  We can either
> > try and stop app developers from innovatively trying new gestures, or
> > we can push the voiceover developers to keep up with new gestures.
> > Keeping up though is a loosing proposition because at some point two
> > apps will use the same new gesture for totally different purposes.
> > 
> > So, is it more ethical to hold back innovation or to leave out the
> > disabled?  My guess is that there's a middle ground to be figured out,
> > but that means we also have to recognize that it's a game of
> > negotiation we're playing, not a game of "we should have what everyone
> > else has."
> > 
> > Take Care,
> > 
> > Jim
> > 
> > On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 11:29:08AM -0500, John G. Heim wrote:
> >> Mike, you're trying to take both sides of a logical point here.  Is this an
> >> ethical question or a strictly utilitarian point you're making?  In other
> >> words, are you asking what's ethical or what works? Either way, it isn't as
> >> simple as you seem to think.
> >> 
> >> No reasonable person would say it's unethical for a society to demand that
> >> it's members go out of their way to help others. Some people seem to think
> >> that it's wrong to force people to be nice. But a society just can't operate
> >> otherwise. You can't really have a society where it's every man for himself
> >> and if you can't cut it, well, too bad, you'll just have to die. You don't
> >> get a stronger society that way, you get chaos. And it's neither ethical or
> >> practical.
> >> 
> >> So the  question really should be will accessibility work? Will this be a
> >> stronger, better society if accessibility laws are passed and enforced? My
> >> opinion is that it's an easy yes.
> >> 
> >> It's fairly obvious that curb cuts and accessible bathrooms have been an
> >> unqualified success. Besides bringing people in wheellchairs into the
> >> mainstream, it has completely changed the way people in wheelchairs are
> >> viewed by society. It's no longer a  strange thing  to see a person in a
> >> wheelchair on a bus or in an elevator.  That access   has  completely
> >> changed the way our society sees people in wheelchairs. If you are in a
> >> wheelchair, you're still expected to get out there and get a job, just like
> >> everyone else. It would be absurd these days for someone who has all their
> >> faculties except use of their legs to say they can't possibly get a job.
> >> Everyone would assume their problem is more in their head than in their
> >> legs.
> >> 
> >> Those of us on this list may or may not consider it reasonable for a blind
> >> person to say they can't get a job because they are blind. But if you think
> >> the rest of the population  sees it that way you are very much mistaken.
> >> Heck, many people think it's reasonable to kill yourself if you're blind.
> >> nd. It's no longer blind people who need to be told that blindness can be a
> >> mere nuisance, it's the general public. We need a cultural shift like the
> >> one we've seen occur with people in wheelchairs over the past few decades.
> >> The way to make that shift happen is for accessibility for the blind to
> >> become as much a part of our way of life as it is for people in wheelchairs.
> >> Sure, there will be a lot of grumbling but in the long run, we'll all be
> >> better off for it.
> >> 
> >> If you ask me if it's ethical for us to ask for laws that require
> >> accessibility, my answer is that it's unethical for us not to.
> >> 
> >> On 05/12/13 17:22, Mike Freeman wrote:
> >>> Actually, there's an unspoken aspect to all this that most of us do not even
> >>> dare to admit to ourselves: that is, while we want "equal access" --
> >>> whatever that is -- and believe that "the law" should be enough to guarantee
> >>> it, what gives us, a small minority, the right to dictate to the majority
> >>> (most workers) what software they can use? It puts us in an awkward position
> >>> when great emphasis is placed these days upon "team play" etc. to say that
> >>> most of the team can't use certain software because we can't access it. Of
> >>> course this begs the larger question as to whether such inaccessible
> >>> software should exist or not. But trying to mandate accessibility in an
> >>> absolute sense amounts to fixing what software development techniques and
> >>> tools can and cannot be used -- an effort that is, in the long run, doomed
> >>> to fail; one cannot stop innovation and by its very definition,
> >>> screen-reader manufacturers cannot adjust to innovations they don't know
> >>> about or that haven't been developed yet.
> >>> 
> >>> This doesn't mean that we shouldn't fight for access as the present lawsuit
> >>> does; we have no choice if we don't want to be returned to the
> >>> rocking-chair. But until someone develops Mr. Data of STNG, we are going to
> >>> be faced with that unspoken dilemma of which I write and it's not an easy
> >>> thing to figure out how to get around it.
> >>> 
> >>> Mike Freeman
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Tami Jarvis
> >>> Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2013 9:13 AM
> >>> To: NFB in Computer Science Mailing List
> >>> Subject: Re: [nfbcs] project tracking software
> >>> 
> >>> Tracy,
> >>> 
> >>> Yeah, and I keep hearing these sorts of stories, where the laws are just
> >>> flat out not followed.
> >>> 
> >>> So I'm really interested in how the lawsuit Mike F. mentioned in an
> >>> earlier post will come out after the long slog... It's depressing in a
> >>> way, though I guess not all that surprising, that it's going to take at
> >>> least as much hard work and effort to get teeth put in those laws as it
> >>> was to get the laws in the first place... Sigh. Then again, I remember
> >>> when those laws were being developed and then finally passed back in the
> >>> day. Since I knew I would be blind sooner or later, I paid attention.
> >>> But, of course, I was not officially a disabled person then, so I got to
> >>> hear the abled folks talk about the horrible imposition in the free way
> >>> bigots talk when they assume you are one of Them... From what I recall
> >>> of what of that was on my limited radar at the time, the reason the laws
> >>> ended up toothless was that that was the only way they could be passed
> >>> in the first place. Of course, I know a lot of you here had real skin in
> >>> that game, so thanks! I've benefitted from your hard work.
> >>> 
> >>> But more remains now, for sure, to get penalties for violators. It's
> >>> just unfortunate that it takes people who would rather be working for a
> >>> living to have to take time out of their lives for lawsuits instead.
> >>> 
> >>> Tami
> >>> 
> >>> On 05/11/2013 05:48 AM, Tracy Carcione wrote:
> >>>> I know this is a ridiculous thing to say, but there is a law requiring
> >>>> the government to only purchase accessible software, right?  Yet they're
> >>>> using JIRA, which Susie says is inaccessible.  Thus, they're breaking
> >>>> the law.  I just thought it had to be said.
> >>>> Tracy
> >>>> 
> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stanzel, Susan - FSA, Kansas City,
> >>>> MO" <Susan.Stanzel at kcc.usda.gov>
> >>>> To: "NFB in Computer Science Mailing List" <nfbcs at nfbnet.org>
> >>>> Sent: Friday, May 10, 2013 5:57 PM
> >>>> Subject: Re: [nfbcs] project tracking software
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>>> The project lead sometimes has to use HP Quallity Center because the
> >>>>> Testing and Certification Office is part of our team. We submit our
> >>>>> software to them for their review before it goes to production. It
> >>>>> would be handy if I could use it, but more handy if I could use JIRA.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Susie
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Steve Jacobson
> >>>>> Sent: Friday, May 10, 2013 2:24 PM
> >>>>> To: NFB in Computer Science Mailing List
> >>>>> Subject: Re: [nfbcs] project tracking software
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Susie,
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> That is interesting that the government is using HP Quality Center.  I
> >>>>> had trouble using it but it turned out I didn't have to so I did not
> >>>>> pursue it.  However, I thought it was more for developing and
> >>>>> executing test cases, although maybe that is just one use.
> >>>>> Whether it helps or not, if I have to use it, knowing it is used by
> >>>>> the government could give me more of a lever to get them to fix those
> >>>>> things that don't appear to be accessible.  Unfortunately, I think
> >>>>> some of the problem I have seen with HPQC may have to do with screen
> >>>>> readers not keeping up as well as they might with modern web approaches.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Steve Jacobson
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> On Fri, 10 May 2013 13:59:16 +0000, Stanzel, Susan - FSA, Kansas City,
> >>>>> MO wrote:
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>> Good moring Everyone,
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>> There are two different project and bug tracking programs used at USDA.
> >>>>>> They are JIRA which appears not to be accessible and HP
> >>>>> Quallity Center which I am not forced to use. Do any of you
> >>>>> successfully use project tracking software? I wish all I had to do in
> >>>>> my job was code (grin).
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>> Susie Stanzel
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>> 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/steve.jacobson%40vis
> >>>>>> i.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/susan.stanzel%40kcc.usda.
> >>> gov
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> 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.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
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> 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/jheim%40math.wisc.edu
> >>> 
> >> 
> >> -- 
> >> ---
> >> John G. Heim, 608-263-4189, jheim at math.wisc.edu
> >> 
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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/jbar%40barcore.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/pblackmer27%40gmail.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/jheim%40math.wisc.edu
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/jbar%40barcore.com
>

More information about the NFBCS mailing list