[nfbcs] Innovation, Usability, Accessibility, standards, and legal requirements.

Mon Mar 3 03:20:29 UTC 2014

Frankly, I fail to see why an all-text site is not doable FOR ALL websites. 
It seems that none of us has a problem with accessibility if the site is 
fundamentall ytext.
Thejava, and scripty graphic mouse overy stuff is ridiculous.
Ian

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Nicole Torcolini" <ntorcolini at wavecable.com>
To: "'NFB in Computer Science Mailing List'" <nfbcs at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 7:47 PM
Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Innovation, Usability, Accessibility, standards,and 
legal requirements.

:I agree in some cases. In that case, then, what is considered a reasonable
: amount of time for the assistive technology to catch? Okay, so that was 
kind
: of a rhetorical question as there is no good answer. Still, for certain
: things, it takes too long. For example, look how long it took for Keysoft,
: used by the BrailleNote, to support docx format. Perhaps there were 
reasons
: for this, but, JMHO, in such situations, companies need to be a little 
more
: forthcoming about what is preventing it.
: Finally, I do think that dynamic web pages have been around long enough 
that
: screen readers should be able to somewhat support them by now, or at least
: looking at what needs to change to better support them. Of course, all of
: this is just my opinion, so throw it to the shark if you want to (joke; 
the
: JAWS icon is a shark).
:
: Nicole and JAWS the talking shark who needs to learn new tricks
:
: -----Original Message-----
: From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mike Freeman
: Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 4:33 PM
: To: 'NFB in Computer Science Mailing List'
: Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Innovation, Usability, Accessibility, standards,and
: legal requirements.
:
: Nicole:
:
: As far as the last item goes, they *can't* change quickly enough since by
: definition they can't anticipate what the next "in" thing will be. 
Moreover,
: some adaptive tech firms don't have the personnel to keep up with changes.
: One sees this particularly in the note-taker biz where users demand nearly
: the same level of access as those of us with Macs or PCs enjoy (limited as
: this sometimes seems) on the grounds that they've forked over a lot of 
dough
: and figure they should get their moneys'-worth -- forgetting that in many
: instances, a good part of that dough goes for piezoelectric Braille cells.
: And those users just can't seem to grock that they're using what amount to
: glorified PDAs. And this holds for real computer users, too -- the problem
: just isn't as acute.
:
: Mike
:
:
: -----Original Message-----
: From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Nicole 
Torcolini
: Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 4:16 PM
: To: 'NFB in Computer Science Mailing List'
: Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Innovation, Usability, Accessibility, standards, and
: legal requirements.
:
: Some of the problems that companies face that make it look like they are 
not
: trying are:
: 1. Something working with some screen readers but not others 2. Not having 
a
: good way to test using screen readers 3. Screen readers not being up to
: speed with the latest trends Number 1 is particularly a problem if
: developers do try to test their code, but can only easily access certain
: screen readers.
: One of the causes of number 2 is the fact that there is often not a good 
way
: to capture what a screen reader says, at least not in a way that is 
useable
: in automated testing.
: An example of number 3 is how some older screen readers, such as JAWS, 
were
: made to work with static web pages, and the methods that they use don't
: often work well with dynamic web pages that are more like applications.
: Although it is not all of the problem, JMHO, a large part of the problem 
is
: that screen reader manufactures haven't changed the screen readers as the
: web has changed, or at least not enough.
:
: -----Original Message-----
: From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mike Freeman
: Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 3:23 PM
: To: 'NFB in Computer Science Mailing List'
: Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Innovation, Usability, Accessibility, standards,and
: legal requirements.
:
: With respect, I suspect that a goodly number are *not* trying very hard.
: However, there *is* what must be a frustrating issue for some of the
: companies -- that of designing software or a web site to be accessible
: according to the guidelines and then discovering that it is fully 
accessible
: with one screen-reader but not with others. :-)
:
: Mike
:
:
: -----Original Message-----
: From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Nicole 
Torcolini
: Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 2:42 PM
: To: 'NFB in Computer Science Mailing List'
: Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Innovation, Usability, Accessibility, standards, and
: legal requirements.
:
: Although I am pretty sure that there are some companies out there that
: aren't trying and/or don't care, I think that we need to be sure that the
: companies are not trying before going after them.
:
: -----Original Message-----
: From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Jim Barbour
: Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 10:52 AM
: To: NFB in Computer Science Mailing List
: Subject: [nfbcs] Innovation, Usability, Accessibility, standards, and 
legal
: requirements.
:
: <note> I'm starting a new thread about this topic because frankly I don't
: know if what I'm about to say applies to new versions of MS office.  I 
truly
: don't know if MS is innovating their user interfaces or if they're just
: being lazy, and would like for *that* conversation to take place on the
: other thread.
: </note>
:
: I was having a similar discussion about innovation with Tim Elder this
: weekend.
:
: It is my rather strong opinion that allowing innovation does, pretty much 
by
: definition, require that we allow new ideas to grow and flourish before
: accessibility can be brought into the picture.
:
: I would say that this applies to most areas of broad usability 
requirements
: such as Internationalization, localization, varying color palettes,
: ergonomic menu placement, etc., etc.
:
: My favorite example of innovation that would have been stopped cold by
: accessibility standards is the whole AJAX/web 2.0 model that Google
: introduced with their gmail product in 2004.
:
: Google could not have released gmail in 2004 if they had been required to
: make it accessible.  They couldn't have, even if they'd wanted to. The
: technology needed to make AJAX accessible, what we now call the ARIA 
roles,
: hadn't been invented yet.
:
: What basically had to happen was a rather long set of conversations 
amongst
: web browser developers, screen reader developers, and web app developers 
to
: figure out how to communicate the necessary information through the
: necessary channels so that screen readers could get the right information 
at
: the right time.
:
: Within the general web usability community, AJAX/web 2.0 is pretty much 
the
: big step for web apps becoming truly user friendly web apps, rather than
: clunky, text based, app like web pages.
:
: Therefore, it's pretty easy to argue that AJAX/web 2.0 was a very 
necessary
: usability step for the general user community,  that the blind were
: (sometimes still are) hurt by this usability improvement, and that screen
: reading technology has to catch up.
:
: This is pretty much the same dynamic that we've seen over and over again.
: When DOS become windows 3.0, UNIX started using X-windows and session
: managers, phones switched from keypads to touch screens, and probably a 
few
: examples I missed.
:
: So, where is the point at which a webapp stops being experimental and 
starts
: being an entity that is expected to provide reasonable accomodations for
: disabled users?
:
: Is it when you have to acknowledge license agreement or terms of service
: page?  Is it when you are expected to give them a credit card number?  Is 
it
: when the site is made available to the general public, as apposed to a
: limited beta? I can argue for and against each of those suggestions.
:
: I do know that the Department of Justice is wrestling with this question,
: along with other questions about how does a web site provider know for 
sure
: that they've made their website accessible.
:
: I'm pretty sure that however the rules come down, they're going to 
seriously
: hamper webapp providers and in turn give us relief from much of the
: inaccessible web content we as blind people have to deal with on a very
: regular basis.  I hope we keep both sides of this in mind when the DOJ
: developes, releases, and begins enforcing these regulations.
:
: In other words, I'm hoping we can figure out a way to go after Google,
: facebook, United airlines, and the US government to get their web sites 
more
: accessible; without also harassing tech startups, non-profits, and my high
: cusin who just put up a really cool visualization tool for how he and his
: friends listen to music.
:
: Take Care All,
:
: JIm
:
: On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 12:26:25PM -0600, Gary Wunder wrote:
: > Dear Mike:
: >
: > Perhaps one of the things we need to address is whether or not making
: > things screen reader compatible truly does limit innovation. Is screen
: > reader technology so far behind state-of-the-art technology that this
: > is the case, or are we talking about the failure to add a few lines of
: > code in this new technology that makes it play well with the assistive
: > technology we need? I lack the expertise to answer this question, but
: > it seems to me to be all important. We go to Congress each year with
: > the message that accessibility is easy and doable. I have never heard
: > the software companies argue to the contrary. What I do often hear
: > from software developers is that it is too costly to go back and
: > modify their legacy code but that new development will certainly
: > incorporate accessibility. Only recently have I heard the idea that
: > demanding accessibility threatens innovation. Can someone with some
: > expertise in state-of-the-art coding and state-of-the-art screen
: > reader technology set me straight. It seems to me that this argument,
: > if true, changes where we need to place our emphasis. If it is false,
: > it needs to be revealed as such. If it is true, then we need to place
: > more emphasis on bringing the screen readers into the second decade of
: > the
: twenty-first century.
: >
: >
: >
: > -----Original Message-----
: > From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mike
: > Freeman
: > Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 11:00 AM
: > To: 'NFB in Computer Science Mailing List'
: > Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Office 2013: Very Much A Work In Progress
: >
: > Gary:
: >
: > I confess that I am beginning to think we're running up against
: > something we ought to be familiar with, being Federationists, but that
: > we don't want to face. That "something" is that we, the blind, are a
: > minority. This is something we're going to come up against more and
: > more as the general universe seeks bling more than information.
: >
: > I confess that I'm beginning to suspect that unless and/or until we
: > come up with *absolutely* iron-clad legislation that, in effect,
: > limits what software vendors are allowed to do to those things wherein
: > we can guarantee accessibility -- in effect, limiting innovation  -- 
: > something which I obviously know won't happen -- we're going to be
: > behind the eight ball even with vendors who claim to put accessibility
: first.
: >
: > I think more and more we will find ourselves forced to old,
: > tried-and-true but much-forgotten and much-maligned strategies -- such
: > as -- gasp -- use of readers.
: >
: > I believe Deborah Kent-Stein and I talked about this a while back and
: > *she* thinks we'll eventually have to come round to a TapTapSee-like
: > app that allows us to point a camera at indecipherable screens and
: > have someone tell us what's going on. I don't think even that would
: > work as corporations would frown on their networks being used for such
: > things and might balk at the possibilities of theft of corporate
: > secrets
: or intellectual property.
: >
: > Mike Freeman
: >
: >
: > -----Original Message-----
: > From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Gary Wunder
: > Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 7:09 AM
: > To: 'NFB in Computer Science Mailing List'
: > Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Office 2013: Very Much A Work In Progress
: >
: > I still respectfully suggest that we put Microsoft on the agenda and
: > try to find out why accessibility always seems to be at the bottom of
: > their priority list. Did screen reader developers have a look at this
: > before it came on the market? Why is it that we were still wrestling
: > with problems in Outlook 2007 when Outlook 2010 hit the market? Is
: > there any kind of consistency between the statement "computing for
: > all" and the kind of release strategy we see from Microsoft?
: >
: > Gary
: >
: > -----Original Message-----
: > From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Elizabeth
: > Campbell
: > Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 8:08 AM
: > To: 'NFB in Computer Science Mailing List'
: > Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Office 2013: Very Much A Work In Progress
: >
: > Hello Curtis,
: >
: > I am using Office 13 at home on my laptop running Windows 8. I must
: > confess that I did not have  the installation headaches as I purchased
: > my system and software from Bestbuy. The store in my area has a very
: > helpful geek squad, and I explained that I wanted to put the computer
: > through its paces using JAWS and so forth before I purchased it.
: > The Best Buy folks took care of all of the installations for me as I
: > purchased a year of tech support for my devices.
: > I primarily use office 13 for Outlook and Word. I am a fan of outlook,
: > so I was very disappointed to see that it often crashes, sometimes
: > while I'm reading or writing a message then mysteriously restarts. IN
: > Word, I haven't used the return address features since I'm creating
: > documents for use at home or at work, and I send 99 percent of my
: correspondences via email.
: > However, I've had a lot of frustration accessing documents that are
: > protected.
: > JAWS will start reading the file and then stop. I believe what happens
: > is that Word shuts down and then restarts because I get a prompt about
: > recovering files which I can never find.
: > Interestingly enough, I ran in to this problem last week when
: > accessing some documents for a Newsline seminar.
: > I believe there is a way to unprotect files, but I haven't found it yet.
: > Curtis, I agree that Office 13 is very much a work in progress, and I
: > hope Microsoft does come out with a service pack that will repair
: > these bugs which make it almost impossible to use Office reliably.
: > At work, I an using Windows 7 and Office 2007,and I haven't had the
: > same frustrations.
: >
: > Best regards.
: >
: > Liz Campbell
: >
: > -----Original Message-----
: > From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Curtis
: > Chong
: > Sent: Friday, February 21, 2014 11:06 AM
: > To: nfbcs at nfbnet.org
: > Subject: [nfbcs] Office 2013: Very Much A Work In Progress
: >
: > Greetings and felicitations:
: >
: > Early this month, I took the rather bold step of upgrading from
: > Microsoft Office 2010 to Microsoft Office 2013. I am running the
: > 64-bit version of Windows 7 Professional.
: >
: > I am interested in hearing from anyone out there who has taken a
: > similar journey. Permit me to provide a brief summary of my
: > experiences so
: far.
: >
: > To begin with, the upgrade was not at all a trouble-free experience.
: > The first thing that Office 2013 wanted me to do was to link to either
: > an existing or new Microsoft account. There appears no way to avoid
: > this
: step.
: > Since I had a Microsoft account (which I had never used for years and
: > years) I had to spend considerable time trying to get my password
: > back. This was only the first problem.
: >
: > Then, Office wanted to set up Sky Drive on my computer, which I
: > allowed at first and have since removed.
: >
: > After the install was finished (hours of work), I tried starting Word.
: > Right away, I received a message (which was not spoken by JAWS for
: > Windows) indicating that the program had stopped working. There seemed
: > to be no way around this problem. In the end, I had to contact
: > Microsoft Support over the telephone so that someone could remote into
: > my computer and run some kind of a repair.
: >
: > While I am now using Microsoft Office 2013 to do real work, I must
: > point out that using this software is not without its problems. For
: > one thing, there are many situations during which JAWS goes silent and
: > during which one simply has to wait for something to happen. For
: > another, there are frequent instances when either Word or Outlook will
: > crash and then recover--all in complete silence (from a nonvisual
: > access
: standpoint).
: >
: > I don't know about the rest of you, but one strategy which I often use
: > is to open a master document from Windows Explorer, bringing it into
: > Word, then save the document under a different name so that I can work
: > on it. On my system right now, there is no way to do this anymore. As
: > soon as I hit F12 to invoke the "Save As..." dialog, Word will
: > immediately
: crash.
: > Interestingly, this does not happen on the Office 2013 system I am
: > using at work. Go figure.
: >
: > There are two other problems worth mentioning. First, in Word, the
: > return and delivery address edit boxes in the Envelopes dialog are not
: > accessible with any screen access program. You simply cannot read the
: > text that may (or may not) be in these boxes. Secondly, in Outlook
: > 2013, the Signature dialog's edit box is just as inaccessible to a
: > nonvisual user as the Envelopes edit boxes in Word.
: >
: > These days, for new users, it is just about impossible to acquire
: > Office 2010. This is most unfortunate inasmuch as I consider Office
: > 2013 to be very much a work in progress. I very much am looking
: > forward to a service pack on this from Microsoft.
: >
: > Cordially,
: >
: > Curtis Chong
: >
: >
: >
: > _______________________________________________
: > 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/batescampbell%40cha
: > rter.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/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/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/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/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/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/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/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/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/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/i.c.bray%40win.net 