[nfbcs] Ethics of screen reader friendly development

Wed May 22 13:39:03 UTC 2013

Well, I don't think you can justify the cost of accessibility on this 
alone but I already gave one specific example showing how accessibility 
features can help even those who aren't disabled. Voiceover makes a 
bluetooth  keyboard easier to use even if you're not blind.  There are 
plenty of other examples. I know a guy on a trivia team who created a 
database of the text from closed captioned TV shows so he could search 
it for quotes when playing trivia. I also think that accessible software 
is usually better than stuff that isn't accessible. But that could be 
false cause. Developers who understand accessibility are probably just 
better programmers. On the other hand, bad programmers often over 
complicate things. They're bad programmers because they choose to do 
things the hard way. They put too many graphics, and too many bells & 
whistles into their programs. These same things often also make their 
programs inaccessible.

A good example of this simpler is better and therefore accessible is the 
original Google user interface circa 1997 or 1998. My opinion is that 
Google became as dominant as it is based as much upon it's uncluttered 
interface as it's search algorithm. Iwas managing the web site for the 
University of Wisconsin at the time and I personally talked to a lot of 
people about Google. Very few of them even noticed that they got better 
results from searches. They all liked the "clean" user interface of 
Google compared to Alta Vista and other search engines. I switched the 
UW's web site to use Google for searches as much for that reason as any 
other.

Anyway, as I said, I don't think you can justify the cost of making 
software accessible on this basis alone. But it's wrong to dismiss it 
out of hand too.
On 05/21/13 18:01, Gabe Vega Via Iphone4S wrote:
> Does it make yourselves feel good to say this kind of crazy stuff? If it was so great to have accessible software, that wouldn't be in excess but software is such a fight to make software accessible to begin with. Come on let's get real. Not everybody wants talking list talking that whatever. It's not cool, it's not better. It's just different
>
> Gabe Vega
> Sent from my iPhone
> CEO
> Commtech LLC
> The leader of computer support, training and web development services
> Web: http://commtechusa.net
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/commtechllc
> Facebook: http://facebook.com/commtechllc
> Email: info at commtechusa.net
> Phone: (888) 351-5289 Ext. 710
> Fax: (480) 535-7649
>
> On May 21, 2013, at 3:37 PM, Nancy Coffman <nancylc at sprynet.com> wrote:
>
>> We also should remember that accessibility features make for better usability. Many people who are not blind or do not have other disabilities also benefit from the accessibility features we need. Software that works well benefits everybody.
>>
>> Nancy Coffman
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On May 20, 2013, at 8:36 PM, "Gary Wunder" <gwunder at earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Wow, what a thought-provoking post.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Jude DaShiell
>>> Sent: Monday, May 20, 2013 6:14 PM
>>> To: NFB in Computer Science Mailing List
>>> Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Ethics of screen reader friendly development
>>>
>>> Everyone needs to remember accessibility has always had two get out of jail
>>> free cards available to those targeted for compliance.  First card is
>>> unreasonable burden which must be and has been proved in the past.
>>> The second get out of jail free card is for a compliance target to be able
>>> to exceed the accessibility standards in question because they have a better
>>> way of providing accessibility than has been done so far available.  That
>>> takes care of both ends of that bell curve, and what's left over to argue
>>> about is the stuff in the middle.  The argument I hear advanced in here
>>> against accessibility could equally be used against security since
>>> substantial amounts of time effort and money have to be spent for that and
>>> prevent work on the next killer features.  The problem at least for the
>>> screen reader community is even if every baby who would be born blind or
>>> become blind at some time in their lives could be detected and aborted in
>>> time the blind population would still not diminish.  Countries will do war
>>> regularly and one of the by-products are blinded veterans who need jobs when
>>> returning home.
>>> Aside from wars, industrial accidents will happen and people have accidents
>>> with shotguns on turkey hunts.  Young kids will take the powder out of caps
>>> with a needle and let it fall into a jar on a table outside until the sun
>>> throws a spark into the jar igniting the powder and causing loss of
>>> eyesight.  All of them are going to need jobs.  Now, it will be possible if
>>> accessible development gets shut off to steer blind people completely away
>>> from the computer field along with all other disabled people requiring
>>> accessibility in order to save the money that would be spent on
>>> accessibility for killer features.  Aside from the problem what kind of jobs
>>> will this class of people have, there is no guarrantee that corporations
>>> will even consider developing those killer features and more likely plough
>>> that money back into higher stock dividends for their investors.  With the
>>> mergers and acquisitions climate as it is now, the big fish eat well and the
>>> people lower down on the pay scales have their jobs at the most jeopardy
>>> when m&a activity happens.  Everything here is connected and moving one
>>> piece sets off chain reactions that spread decisions taken throughout the
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/theblindtech%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
>

-- 
---
John G. Heim, 608-263-4189, jheim at math.wisc.edu