[nfbcs] Some thoughtful writing on how to get accessibility and how to avoid not having it stop you from doing what you want to do

[Elizabeth Campbell]

Hello Gary,

Thank you for focusing on this important topic.
I am no expert in accessibility, but I deal with these issues in the
ever-changing journalism landscape. I will contact you off list to suggest a
couple of ideas.

Best

Liz

-----Original Message-----
From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Gary Wunder via
nfbcs
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 1:23 PM
To: 'NFB in Computer Science Mailing List' <nfbcs at nfbnet.org>
Cc: Gary Wunder <GWunder at earthlink.net>
Subject: [nfbcs] Some thoughtful writing on how to get accessibility and how
to avoid not having it stop you from doing what you want to do

I write this to the computer science list, but feel free to pass it along to
others if you think they may contribute. In a number of threads I read on
this list and others, many of us are frustrated by the lack of accessibility
we find in required software. We rejoice when president Riccobono tells us
about a challenge undertaken and a company we have one over to
accessibility. What sometimes goes unsaid and may be misunderstood is that
we can't sue everybody all at the same time. So the question many of us
tackle is how we get what we need while at the same time pressing for what
we really want. The solution seems obvious: using a human reader while
trying to engage the company in dialogue. But my experience of late is that
this is not considered a legitimate way to react by accessibility
evangelists who seem to characterize the use of a human reader as a selling
out or breaking a sacred packed with others who want accessibility. Now I
enjoy the philosophical debate that goes on here, but I hate it when people
miss opportunities that could bring them good careers.

All of this is by way of introduction, I am actually pandering. I am looking
for thoughtful articles on the subject to appear in the pages of the Braille
Monitor. How do we feel about a piece of software that is very usable once
it is installed but cannot be installed by us directly because there is a
button that the screenreader cannot identify labeled install. Would it be
enough to dissuade you from using that particular piece of software, or
would you use the software, tell the developer about his inaccessible
installation process, and take the time to complement him on those things
that work well? To what extent are we willing to use visual interpreting
services in order to have access? Do we view these services as unacceptable,
a temporary bridge until we get accessibility, or an absolute necessity as
we are overwhelmed by kiosks, ziosks, and unattended food markets? If a
service or a device is inaccessible and we use a visual interpreter, does it
matter whether that visual interpreter serves us through artificial
intelligence or biological intelligence?

I know it is always easier to ask provocative questions than to come up with
answers, but I would love to see the Braille Monitor explore these issues.
We have done a bit on visual interpreting services, but I don't think that
we have begun to say all that needs to be said about how to function in a
world where accessibility is always a moving target. My preference is to see
articles; I would settle for a healthy discussion from which one of us might
create one or more articles.

Thank you for reading the Braille Monitor, and thanks for considering being
an active part of what goes into it. Let's make this topic something to
write home about.


_______________________________________________
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%40gmail.com