Web Site Accessibility Blog

This is part 2 of my series on Accessible Search. In part one, I posted the full text of the interview with Google’s Dr. T.V. Raman. Using that interview and interviews with end users, I wrote this article, which was posted in short form at Search Engine Watch.

Interestingly, most low-vision or AT users prefer Google or Ask as their primary search engine. Overwhelmingly, it is because of the interface. Both Google and Ask feature a stripped down interface rather than a portal-style interface, such as Yahoo! and MSN. Portal interfaces do not score well with low vision, blind, or AT users because of the “noise” it creates in the experience.
Here is the full article:

The Divergence of Accessible Search

Earlier this summer, Google released an Accessible Search Beta through its labs projects. The Accessible Search was the personal project of Dr. T.V. Raman, who came to Google about a year prior. The move by Google to release the project came on the heels of Google changing from the visual-based security device of the CAPTCHA, where users have to type the letters that they see in an image. Google added an audio component as a response to online petitions and outcry from the visually-impaired users. Blind users were not able to access many Google services, such as GMail, Blogger, Google Groups, and a Google Account as the visual-based security kept them from participating in Google’s services.

Dr. Raman comes from a background of advocating standards-based programming and structured data on the web. This made its way to the Accessible Search algorithm that favors standards-based websites. This was a natural method of creating the accessible focus of the search:

“For accessibility, clean, well-structured semantic markup is the best thing you could hope to have. The three key phrases “clean” “well-structured” and “semantic” are all important in the above. Adherence to specs definitely makes checking easier. . . I believe that Web sites creating clean, well-formed XHTML content will, over time, find it significantly easier to serve all their users better — simply because their content will be easier to manage and evolve.”

The Accessible search was received positively by the Blind community, yet many low-vision users took issue with the tagline of “Search for the Visually Impaired.” This was typical of larger issues in the accessibility community that many sites are accessible for blind users, yet the same amount of accessibility is not available to low-vision users, who require different methods in order to access the content.

Regardless of a few criticisms, the reception was positive overall. The end result was that users found this to be a useful tool. “And that’s our goal,” said Dr. Raman.

Despite the contention among the different groups, Google is widely accepted as the search engine of choice. The main reason is the uncluttered interface, which makes it easy for users using magnification interfaces, screen readers, or a joystick interface.

Diversity of Access

The main obstacle is that accessibility is varied by need, rather than a single fix. Because of the varied nature of access, assistive technology, and multiple needs, sites must cater to a host of diverse combinations.

Here is a small sample of that diverse group and how they rely on the search interface:

Lee

Lee has albinism, and one of the main factors is low-vision. Lee is a long-time computer and Internet user and has had extremely low-vision since birth. The growth of the Internet has been the opening of a limitless world for her, as phone books, maps and other small-print formats have all been replaced with internet versions that are easier to understand and read.

She relies on the Apple’s built-in magnification software in her daily browsing. She prefers to view yellow or white text on a black background for added contrast. She prefers to use the search engine Big.com, which is powered by Ask. Big.com is built specifically for low-vision users, enabling them to read the large-font results without eye strain.

Lee explains how she sees:

“I have a difficulty seeing details at a distance. I also have problems reading small print and light and glare are an issue as well. I have nystagmus (an uncontrollable and irregular motion of the eyes). The world doesn’t move, but my brain has to work harder to provide a stable image. Eye fatigue is an issue. Compared to most people with albinism, I have fairly good vision and am able to get by with minor modifications.”

The Accessibility search was not helpful to her, as it was obvious that it was initially created for blind users. However, she is a Google Search fan. She would like the ability to store her Google preferences through a cookie so that her background and text color preferences would be automatic.

Lee is very active in the albinism community, which shares information, but she was not aware of the new Accessible Search feature. She feels that search engines respond to the accessibility community very slowly and thinks that information passes slowly as a “trickle-down” effect.

Glenda

Glenda has an inspirational story and is currently writing a book about overcoming Cerebral Palsy and building a life for herself. Glenda uses a combination of assistive technologies to interact online. Her main input device is a keyboard, on a non-slip mat. This is critical as she slides her hand along the top of the keyboard and uses her left thumb to hit each key. Any movement or involuntary jerk would move the keyboard if not for the non-slip mat. This also affects her use of a standard mouse. It its place she uses a joystick to control the cursor movements. Along with this, she uses word prediction software that predicts the words that she is typing, which saves on keystrokes.

Glenda does not have any vision impairments, but she relies on interfaces that are clear, simple, and have a consistent design. The consistent design makes it easier for her to find information, while cluttered pages and flashing animation distract her from easily navigating the page. She prefers the Google Toolbar because of the simple interface and availability for searches.

Even though she is a ten-year internet user, she relies on simple interfaces to use websites, read pages, and interact. She does not need the low-vision or blind accessibility features, but rather features than enable her to input information easily and do not distract her by moving or flashing elements.

Chris

Chris is a JAWS power-user; in fact, he had a major hand in its development. He is blind, but is able to use the internet and related technologies faster than most sighted persons. He has been online long before HTML was the protocol and used to use emacs as an interface to a chat program.

Chris prefers Google and Ask, mainly for the clean interfaces they offer, but also likes using search pages designed for hackers, especially when searching for technical information. No matter which search engine he uses, he is able to use all of the tricks in JAWS to filter out the noise and find specific information.

For users who don’t understand how to use JAWS, Chris understands their frustration:

“Unfortunately, most users don’t know about or care to invest the time in learning how to access such things quickly, so [they] struggle with “accessibility.” I think, on search engines, the greatest accessibility problems are no longer issues that can be corrected with the WAI or 508 guidelines but, rather, are design principles for usability. What is “usable” to people with varying levels of vision impairment has hardly been studied and those of us interested in doing so are few and far between. So, in my opinion, moving from “accessible” to “usable” will take another decade.”

To Chris, and many others, it is a factor of usability, which is why Google and Ask get high marks for their simple interface. Yahoo and MSN search are not rated highly because of the portal style interface that is loaded with information and links, which is “too noisy”. Search engines that use the Turing test to filter bots are also a huge obstacle to enjoying many of the custom features. Google’s removal of the Turing test was big news to the blind community this year.

Overall, Chris feels that search engines have improved as a whole, mainly by integrating more accessibility and standards-based programming into their results pages. But no matter what anyone says, he still finds Flash to be an “accessibility nightmare.” He seeks information that “is best expressed as text or audio.”

Continued Development at Google
Obviously, progress hasn’t stopped for future development of Google’s accessible search. Recently, the Accessible Search has been improved to give blind users access to the same advanced search features that are available in the regular Google search.

Dr. Raman, who has been intimately involved with building speech-enabled interfaces for many years, sees the Google Accessible Search as “a good first step in delivering the most accessible information online” and that Google will continue to develop ways to be more accessible.

He welcomes any user feedback, as “we get better when we know what works for the user and welcome feedback on everything from improving taglines to adding new features.”

Dr, Raman feels that the impact of the Accessible Search will go beyond a simple service and one that will affect the development of the web. “I hope that as we continue to improve Accessible Search, we’ll have a long-term positive impact on increasing awareness of the need to create clean, accessible Web content.”