Serotek Offers Free K-12 Computing Tool for Blind

In the past, accessibility advocates have promoted the 'design for all' and 'one size fits all' approaches to web design, where a single version of the site is designed to be accessible to everyone, regardless of ability or disability. However, personalisation is now a very common web design practice where everyone who visits a site (be they disabled or not) is served a version of the content and design that is optimised according to their individual needs and preferences.

In the 'real' world we are naturally opposed to alternative entrances to buildings or different levels of service provision for disabled people, as 'alternative' and 'different' in this context often means 'segregated' and 'poorer quality'. However, online personalisation really means 'better quality' with web experiences optimised to better suit every individual.

This does not mean text-only versions of sites for disabled people. But it can mean optimised content that is easier and quicker to navigate if you are using a screenreader (for example).

Notice recently issued by the FCC regarding the transition to digital TV. The notice provides some fast facts and focuses in particular on the availability and access to video description. The attached provides specific information regarding testing of two digital-to-analog converter boxes which people will need after the transition to digital TV in Feb 2009 if they don’t have a digital TV or access to cable or satellite services. Every household can acquire two $40.00 coupons to offset the cost of buying a converter box.

The National Center for Accessible Media (NCAM) in Boston has been doing some testing of converter boxes, but as yet there is not a comprehensive source identifying the functions and features and limitations of devices. People should be made aware that if they need video description or closed captioning they should be smart shoppers. According to Larry Goldberg at NCAM despite some occasional glitches and crashes, all converter boxes will pass closed captioning data thru the decoder box and many will decode both analog and digital captions.

The results were surprising. Of the 100-page sample, 97% contained accessibility errors. If this sample is indicative of web content broadly found in higher education, it may signal a decrease in accessibility over previous reports. Data were also analyzed for types of accessibility problems.

Here are a few highlights:

• Of the 97 pages that contained repetitive navigation, 85 pages (88%) had missing or broken skip-to-content links. This was the most commonly violated checkpoint.
• Of the 76 pages that had form elements, 63 pages (83%) had at least one element with a missing or incorrectly associated label. From this sample, the vast majority of the pages had only one form element: the search box.
• Each of the 100 pages that were evaluated had at least one image. From the sample, 71% had at least one image with missing or inappropriate alternative text.

]]> Accessibility http://jebswebs.net/blog/index.php?itemid=43 Tue, 29 Apr 2008 11:08:56 -0400 http://jebswebs.net/blog/index.php?itemid=40 Stevie Wonder

I found this in Dan Jellinek's E-Access Newsletter for April 2008. It describes the five most common web accessibility problems from the perspective of a blind user. Very informative.

BTW, I have been publishing a series of articles regarding accessibility on the Maine CITE Accessible Web Design site and just so happened to do one recently on this same topic. Check that out too since I provide resources for how to find and fix the issues mentioned here.

+10: The Power of Five.

The local government Society of IT Management (Socitm) this week published a report on website accessibility which included a round-up of the five most common accessibility errors.

The society estimates that these five errors account for 76% of all website accessibility failures, and it asked Robin Christopherson, Head of Accessibility Services at the charity AbilityNet, to describe their impact. Robin is blind and uses the popular 'JAWS' screen reader software to access the web.

An edited version of Robin's assessment follows.

"Common failure 1 is to have no alternative text for images.

"This is an extremely common occurrence. I visit a website and am confronted with numerous unlabelled images. For mouse users this 'alternative text' is what pops up when you hover over the image. The average web page has dozens of images, from photos and adverts to 'eye-candy' such as spacing graphics and design flourishes. Many of these images are also clickable links or buttons, and not knowing what these are makes navigation impossible. Imagine trying to drive from A to B where the signposts at every roundabout or junction are blank. A disaster!

"Every single image on a website should be properly labelled. You don't need to begin captions by saying "Picture of.", as I already know it's a picture. You don't need to label 'spacer' or 'eye-candy'
images (but give these a default caption so that the page still passes the accessibility checkers) and, above all, make sure that all images that are also links or buttons describe what will happen when you click on them, e.g., alternative text as "Marilyn Monroe - click to read her life story".

"As well as revolutionising the site for blind users, labelled images will also help those with dyslexia and literacy difficulties who use text to speech software (they hover their mouse over any text or image and the content is spoken out). It will also help those with images turned off (many hand-held users do not display images) and, last but by no means least, Google loves labelled images.

"Common failure Two is the inappropriate use of JavaScript.

"JavaScript is used to write mini-programs that are embedded in web pages and can enhance their functionality. They are very widely used and set to increase dramatically with 'Web 2.0' applications.

"My screen reader (JAWS) is one of the most sophisticated, but there are still many occasions when some uses of JavaScript leave me confused or frustrated, roaming at length to discover what bit of the page (if any) has changed after clicking that link, or finding that I am totally unable to access that shopping cart as selecting that button using the keyboard does nothing at all.

"It isn't enough to offer an alternative for those not using JavaScript, thinking that disabled users do not have JavaScript switched on as a matter of course. The vast majority of users of assistive technologies (such as screen readers, voice recognition, magnification, alternative keyboards and mice) can benefit from JavaScript functions as much as anyone, with the major caveat that there are certain uses of JavaScript that are not accessible to these technologies.

"The simple solution is to test your pages with these technologies to ensure that your particular application of JavaScript is not problematic.

"Common failures 3 and 4 are errors in simple and complex data tables.

"Thankfully, these days most websites use style sheets rather than tables to style and arrange the blocks of content on a web page. Where data tables are concerned, however, it is still the case that most are not coded in such a way that the relevant headings are spoken by a screen reader when moving from cell to cell. I hear '1327' and '1727' with no idea of whether these are sales of widgets or notable dates in history.

"The solution is to make sure that all headings of columns and rows are coded using the 'th' tag instead of the 'td' tag. A screen reader will then announce these along with the contents of the cell, putting the data in context (eg "Widgets sold in June, 1327").

"And finally, common failure 5 is the use of features with a lack of accessible alternatives.

"Here you are confronted with an inaccessible bit of content or function and you search for a way around the obstacle, but to no avail.
A classic example is 'CAPTCHA'. A CAPTCHA is a type of security test used to determine whether the user is human (and so exclude automated spamming programmes). A common type of CAPTCHA requires that the user type the letters of a distorted image. Since the image is by definition unlabelled (as otherwise it can be read by malicious software) an alternative (such as an option to register by phone or email) is essential.

"When it becomes clear that you have content or function that cannot be made accessible, offer an accessible alternative. For example, the Google accounts sign-up process that uses CAPTCHA also has a link to an audio version of the code to be entered plus a link to contact customer services for those who cannot access either the visual or the auditory option.

"Always remember that an accessible site is a popular site - and not just for the disabled community. Research has shown that a site that is designed with accessibility in mind is also easier to use by all."

NOTE: 'A world denied: a supplement for Better connected 2008 on website accessibility' is available from Socitm. It is free to subscribers to the society's Insight programme; £50 for non-subscribers in the public and voluntary sectors and £99 for private sector non- subscribers.

Copyright 2008 Headstar Ltd http://www.headstar.com/eab

Editor - Dan Jellinek
Reporter: Majeed Saleh
Editorial advisor - Kevin Carey
Marketing Executive - Claire Clinton
Sales and Marketing - Jo Knell, Will Knox.

]]> Accessibility http://jebswebs.net/blog/index.php?itemid=40 Mon, 21 Apr 2008 11:12:12 -0400 http://jebswebs.net/blog/index.php?itemid=38 BobbyI was a little late in getting the news, and just read about it in the WebAIM newsletter that Bobby - the first of the accessibility checkers - has met his demise.

According to a report on Accessites.org, Bobby - and its current owners, Watchfire, were bought lock, stock, and web app by none other than Big Blue himself - IBM.

Frankly, I was never a big fan of Bobby. It was not so much that the application didn't work, it was the many users who though by simply putting a "Bobby Button" on their website they were "protected." I had people (potential clients) who insisted that the "Bobby Button" was all they had to do. Needless to say, 99% of the time their websites were fairly inaccessible.

Bobby, some will recall started as a free service from CAST in Massachusetts, but was eventually sold off to Watchfire when the grant funds ran out. I was a bit annoyed by the new owners who were always out to push their products. I guess I saw their actions as rather mercenary. Yeah, I know, I'm just as bad.

Anyway, Bobby is gone - at least for now.

~jeb]]> General http://jebswebs.net/blog/index.php?itemid=38 Sat, 1 Mar 2008 15:49:20 -0500 http://jebswebs.net/blog/index.php?itemid=35 jebswebs logoI read with some enthusiasm about how I should upgrade/update to the latest version of Joomla! (v1.5.1). After all it was now XHTML compliant and the best thing since sliced bread. There was even this highly detailed migration document which provided assurance that it was going to be a piece of cake.

Well not exactly.

In fairness there were several caveats which suggested the process might not go smoothly. It hasn't.

After three tries to get the old database to migrate, I have given up and will simply re-populate the site with new content. The old stuff was getting a bit dated - and frankly there wasn't much of it. I have always used this site primarily as a bit of a testing pad with lots of bells and whistles that I really didn't need (e.g., calendar, psh!).

Well the first big challenge, after the database disaster, was the template. The fact that the old template I had purchased a few years ago for the old version would not work on version 1.5. I suspect this is due to the layout now using CSS in place of Tables, but in any case, I plopped down some more money and purchased one of a few 1.5-ready templates available from Joomlashack. These are some of the nice people out in joomaland that provide some real support and generally have been helpful in the past.

So, if you are contemplating making a move to v1.5 from 1.0.x - be forwarned.

I'll keep you posted as the process continues...

~j]]> General http://jebswebs.net/blog/index.php?itemid=35 Sat, 23 Feb 2008 15:38:22 -0500 http://jebswebs.net/blog/index.php?itemid=33 Section 508.gov

What will truly be a monumental task, the revision process on Section 508 of the Vocational Rehabilitation Act has begun. Section 508 was first introduced into legislation in 1998 but the rules were promulgated several years later. This fact alone suggests the revision process will likely also take years.

From Section508.gov:

"Section 508 was enacted to eliminate barriers in information technology, to make available new opportunities for people with disabilities, and to encourage development of technologies that will help achieve these goals. The law applies to all Federal agencies when they develop, procure, maintain, or use electronic and information technology. Under Section 508 (29 U.S.C. ‘ 794d), agencies must give disabled employees and members of the public access to information that is comparable to the access available to others."

What most people don’t realize is that the majority of the Section deals with hardware and software issues; only a relatively small (though important) section deals with web accessibility. It is that area I am most interested in for a number of reasons.

Perhaps the most important reason is the fact that many other organizations and agencies use the Section 508 standards as the basis for their own web accessibility policy. So, as this section of the law changes it will have a direct effect on other groups as well.

Second, as many of us watch the Target.com lawsuit proceedings in the court, I suspect that Section 508 will become the benchmark by which the final judgment will be made. I’ll assume for the moment that Section 508 version 2 will meet or exceed the current standards, but the fear I have is that something similar will happen to what’s been happening with the W3C-WAI Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG). There are many in the web accessibility community who think that the latest draft version of the WCAG falls far short of the original document, making the rules less restrictive, and thus making websites potentially less accessible.

WebAIM has provided a blog entry which discusses the process and they for obvious reasons are already participating actively in the revision process.

Stay tuned.

~jeb

]]> Accessibility http://jebswebs.net/blog/index.php?itemid=33 Sat, 3 Nov 2007 13:45:34 -0400 http://jebswebs.net/blog/index.php?itemid=32 Can Stevie read your docs?

I will be doing a workshop tomorrow at the University of Maine in Augusta for the University System folks about Accessible Documents. The basic premise of this workshop is that perhaps 85-90% of this work involves thinking about what you are doing, as opposed to simple procedures.

The workshop will be broken up into sections dealing with basic office suite software like MS-Office and WordPerfect; Adobe Acrobat PDF documents, and; a little bit about HTML/CSS.

Unfortunately, the workshop is not open to the general public, but the resources will be. I will be posting them all on the Maine CITE Accessible Web Design (AWD) page. The resources include some screen captures of procedures and some "cheat sheets." I am planning to also post the PowerPoint presentation and maybe if I find the time, I will do a podcast version of the presentation. We'll see.

The resources can be found here on the Maine CITE AWD page

~jeb]]> Accessibility http://jebswebs.net/blog/index.php?itemid=32 Sun, 28 Oct 2007 14:10:09 -0400