[nfbcs] Google Accessibility was RE: evaluation display of a web page

Kevin Fjelsted kfjelsted at gmail.com
Wed Nov 6 04:59:32 UTC 2013 

My concern with Aria is that of the millions of web pages out there only a small minority will implement it.
I think that there needs to be a focus on implementing Aria where it can be done but the CSS analysis and Javascript and event analysis needs to be a major focus. This can only be done if the accessibility interface or screen reading functions are deeply integrated with the browser or have a deep data access.
-Kevin

On Nov 5, 2013, at 9:41 PM, Nicole Torcolini <ntorcolini at wavecable.com> wrote:

> Actually, no one should be getting mad at this question as it is a very good
> one. My opinion is that the answer is that it is the responsibility of all
> parties involved--the manufacturer of the screen reader, the manufacturer of
> the browser, and the producer of the websites.
> As there is a growing desire to make websites that are more complex than
> that which native HTML can support, there seems to be a movement away from
> native HTML, which is what most screen readers support the best. The way to
> make custom web controls now is to take a HTML element that does not already
> have functionality, such as a span or div, and attach one or more event
> listeners as well as decorating it with CSS. This clearly does not work for
> screen readers, though, as a screen reader has no way of telling that the
> element has functionality. The solution to this problem is Accessible Rich
> Internet Applications (WAI-ARIA). From http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/:
> Accessibility of web content requires semantic information about widgets,
> structures, and behaviors, in order to allow assistive technologies to
> convey appropriate information to persons with disabilities. This
> specification provides an ontology of roles, states, and properties that
> define accessible user interface elements and can be used to improve the
> accessibility and interoperability of web content and applications. These
> semantics are designed to allow an author to properly convey user interface
> behaviors and structural information to assistive technologies in
> document-level markup. This document is part of the WAI-ARIA suite described
> in the WAI-ARIA Overview.
> 
> Okay, so why doesn't this solve all of the problems?
> 
> 1. Even though it is clearly defined how the roles and attributes are to be
> interpreted and presented to the user, not all screen readers follow these
> guidelines. For example, JAWS allows the user to specify how the accessible
> should be determined instead of following the ARIA spec.
> 
> 2. Even if ARIA is used, a screen reader only gets the information that the
> browser passes to it. This explains why there are often differences in how
> well the same screen reader will work on a particular website in different
> browsers. Chrome Vox actually does not really have this problem because it
> has direct access to the HTML without having to work with only what the
> browser gives it.
> 
> 3. Finally, even when the screen readers and browsers work correctly
> together, it still does not solve the problem unless the producers of the
> websites use ARIA. Not everyone knows about ARIA. Also, those who do
> sometimes inadvertently do not quite use it in the correct way or do not
> understand it. It is hard to visually test if ARIA is giving the desired
> result as ARIA, for the most part, does not modify the visual appearance.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Michael Babcock
> Sent: Monday, November 04, 2013 3:29 PM
> To: 'NFB in Computer Science Mailing List'
> Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Google Accessibility was RE: evaluation display of a
> web page
> 
> I'm going to go out on a limb and ask something that I've been curious
> about... Likely this message will make someone mad.
> Why is it google's responsibility to make there products accessible?
> Why isn't it freedom scientifics or GW Micro's responsibility to make there
> screen readers work better? I mean seriously we all fork out $800+ for our
> screen readers on top of the price of the computer, (or state departments
> do), and when something doesn't work the manufacture of the screen reader
> blames inaccessibility from the vendor of the software were trying to use?
> Sounds like someone is just pushing the blaim onto someone else to me...
> IMO, and this is why I just use a 40 minute demo of jaws, and narrator with
> nvda... I don't buy screen readers, and won't pay for one. Now, I understand
> that people who write software can do better to make there software more
> accessible, however, google is going to worry about making there stuff
> accessible with there screen readers (chromevox, talkback, etc), and
> honestly jaws and voiceover will take backburner. 
> michael
> I work from home, and you can to.
> http://myownpay.com/
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Steve Jacobson
> Sent: Monday, November 4, 2013 4:00 PM
> To: NFB in Computer Science Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Google Accessibility was RE: evaluation display of a
> web page
> 
> Jim,
> 
> One struggle I have is that I think in some cases Google is trying to do
> some leading edge stuff that perhaps could be accessible but isn't supported
> well by screen readers.  Our only choice to some degree is to ask companies
> like Google to slow down, but I really think we need to get a better handle
> on what the limits are to current accessibility and when we need to pressure
> screen readers and when we need to pressure companies to conform some to
> existing standards and good practices.  From what I know of screen reader
> development, the problem isn't simply that screen readers don't bother
> supporting what might be supported better but that they are having to try to
> support so much that is new that they can't keep up.  What I don't think
> people recognize is that the more resources one puts into a project, the
> more management overhead is also added.  I don't think it is even
> proportional, the ratio goes up faster.  By management overhead, I don't
> mean people as much as all that has to be done to track changes and test new
> features as well as making sure old features are not broken in the process.
> I have found, for example, that some of Google's pages work better when one
> turns off JFW's virtual cursor or Window-Eyes' Browse Mode.  Unfortunately,
> there are still gaps, but it causes me to unsure when I should be
> complaining to Google and when it is the screen readers.  I also don't know
> how to resolve this adequately.  I really think we as consumers need to
> somehow understand this better as we move forward.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Steve Jacobson
> 
> On Mon, 4 Nov 2013 13:47:25 -0800, Jim Barbour wrote:
> 
>> It is true that Google, and every other web application developer, 
>> releases code far more frequently than older PC based software did.
>> However, it's still a good idea to let google know when you find thuff 
>> that doesn't work.
> 
>> The same is true for Apple.
> 
>> I don't know why, but we blind folks seem especially unwilling to speak 
>> up and let companies know when stuff isn't working for us.  We seem to 
>> have the rather toxic idea that "they should know if accessibility is 
>> broken and if they don't want to fix it then I'm going to help them."
> 
>> Jim
> 
>> On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 01:40:37PM -0800, Mike Freeman wrote:
>>> The problem is that "fixes" may not stick. Google is tinkering with 
>>> its stuff constantly. The phrase "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" is 
>>> not in their vocabulary.
>>> 
>>> Mike Freeman
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Nicole 
>>> Torcolini
>>> Sent: Saturday, November 02, 2013 3:16 PM
>>> To: 'NFB in Computer Science Mailing List'
>>> Subject: [nfbcs] Google Accessibility was RE: evaluation display of a 
>>> web page
>>> 
>>> April and all, if you are having problems with Google products, 
>>> please let them know. They may not be able to fix it right away, but 
>>> they still want to know and might be able to tell you some kind of 
>>> work
> around.
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of April 
>>> Brown
>>> Sent: Saturday, November 02, 2013 2:05 PM
>>> To: nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>>> Subject: Re: [nfbcs] evaluation display of a web page
>>> 
>>> Ten years or so ago, I learned HTMl and attempted to code accessible 
>>> from W3schools.  They do have Code check.  I don't think it's that 
>>> good.  In the last year I have lost most of my vision, and much of my 
>>> hearing, so it's even more important than ever!  And I always wanted 
>>> to
> code accessible.
>>> Though, knowing some varying issues, especially with vision, I'm not 
>>> 100% sure it is possible to code for every variation.  I may be wrong.
>>> 
>>> Hi *Susan Stanzel,  It would be wonderful if programs on both ends 
>>> could fix the issues to make websites more accessible.  And I agree.
>>> I have tried to learn NVDA, and well, learning keyboard workarounds 
>>> is ten times harder than HTML ever was!
>>> 
>>> Hi ***Mike Jolls - Since you evaluate websites for accessibility, can 
>>> I ask you a question?  For the last few years, my author website has 
>>> been on a Google site.  Are Google websites accessible?  I can change 
>>> some of the coding, though much of what I think would need to be 
>>> adjusted is not accessible to the page holders that I can find.
>>> 
>>> Thanks.  Still new to the world of mostly deaf and blind, and the 
>>> screen readers that confuse me when they don't just work when I open 
>>> the page.*
>>> 
>>> *
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/ntorcolini%40wavec
>>> able.co
>>> m
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/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/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/empoweringtheblind%40iclo
> ud.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/ntorcolini%40wavecable.co
> m
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/kfjelsted%40gmail.com

More information about the NFBCS mailing list