Web Site Accessibility Blog

Webcredible got some press recently with their survey of UK retailer websites. According to their study, 35% of retailers fail to meet the Disability Discrimination Act. In disabled access tests, the average score was 57%, but H Samuel topped the list with a 76% accessibility rating.

Webcredible offers the the details of this December 2007 report as a PDF, “Accessibility for Ecommerce High Street Retailers 2007“, free with email registration.

Matt Bailey, founder of the AccessibilityBlog.com, will present an Accessibility and Usability training class in London. The four-hour class will take place on February 22nd from 1:00 PM to 5:00 PM at the Business Design Center, 52 Upper Street, Islington.

The class will focus on the development of accessible,yet usable websites. Many times, organizations focus on the accessibility of a website or intranets, yet overlook the aspects of usability. In some cases, programming meant to improve usability may be contradictory to user expectations. User testing, practical applications, and case studies will be presented and discussed.

The class is offered in conjunction with the Search Engine Strategies Conference and Training Classes. The Search Conference will be held from the 19th-21st, with intensives offered on the 22nd. Bailey will also be speaking on Search-Friendly Design in the Tuesday session.

Matt Bailey is president and founder of SiteLogic Marketing and an internationally recognized authority on search engine marketing, website analytics, usability, and accessibility. As a consulting and training company, SiteLogic focuses on helping organizations and site owners take control of their websites and their web marketing plans.

With over a decade in the web marketing industry, Matt excels in combining his marketing background with programming know-how to help companies create comprehensive strategies that improve internet presence and profitability.

Sought after worldwide as a seminar presenter and teacher; Matt speaks regularly for The Direct Marketing Association; Search Engine Strategies Conferences and Training; the American Advertising Federation, and private training seminars. Matt is known for his conversational, entertaining speaking style and his ability to make technical topics both understandable and practical.

Matt oversees The Direct Marketing Association’s SEO Training Program and is the trainer for the DMA’s Web Marketing Seminar. He has consulted with hundreds of companies and government agencies.

You can register and find more information at the Search Engine Strategies website.

Target loses an appeal of the class action status of the Lawsuit brought by the National Federation of the Blind. Target had appealed the class-action status of the suit to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The petition was denied and the lawsuit will proceed “on behalf of all Americans.”

This seems to be some of the last challenges to the suite that Target has brought. The actual case has yet to begin, as Target has challenged many of the aspects of the case, the class-action status being the latest. It should be interesting to see when a court date is set, or if this will even get to court.

ON a related note, the NFB and Amazon.com announced that Amazon.com will be accessible to blind users by June 30, 2008.

Source: NFB Press Release

Nielson Group offers research data as a gift for the New Year.

Jacob Nielson, whom I have long admired for his excellent research into web usability, is offering a fantastic PDF report for free on his website. I am not sure if this is a limited time offer, so go download it NOW.

The report addresses factors that are usually overlooked when companies create accessible websites – usability. Having first-hand experience with testing accessible yet unusable designs and programming, this document is a must read. Simply creating a website that is accessible does not make a website easy to use. In some cases it can make it more difficult. Often overlooked, usability is a prime component of accessibility. While most people focus on the physical aspects of accessibility, there are also the cognitive aspects where people need the site to be simple, consistent, and understandable.

Bottom line: Being technically accurate in accessibility is great for machines, but not always good for users.

Beyond ALT Text: Making the Web Easy to Use for Users With Disabilities
75 Best Practices for Design of Websites and Intranets, Based on Usability Studies with People Who Use Assistive Technology

The Accessibility Interoperability Alliance, AIA (http://www.accessinteropalliance.org) has been formed from some of the World’s biggest technology companies: Adobe, BayFirst Solutions, HP, Microsoft, and Novell. Included in the founding of this alliance are a number of specialist assistive technology companies: Claro Software, Dolphin Computer Access, GW Micro, HiSoftware, Mandentec, TextHelp Systems and Qualilife.

The new alliance plans to work together to increase interoperability between new and existing technologies, design new solutions, increase accessibility innovation, and improve developer guidelines. The initial project in this alliance is to create a standard for keyboard shortcuts so that users will have consistent behavior of AT products in any web browser.

This alliance is a key step to building a collaborative base of technologies and guidelines for development. Just this step can help increase the consistency for all users in their web and software experience. Additional development and bringing in of new companies and technologies will only help the assistive technology user, and also create a better experience as a whole.

Hattip to Joe Clark.

The Target v NFB lawsuit seems to be cruising to the netherworld of settlement. Meaning that it will be even longer until there is substantial (or intelligent) legislation or precedent establishing the responsibility of companies in developing an accessible presence online. Who would have thought it would take legal action to make a site easier to use and accessible, thereby increasing the potential reach to customers?

Joe Clark posted extensively about the agreement reach between Amazon.com and the NFB. I can’t begin to recount his excellent survey of the situation, so I’ll only “stand on his shoulders” and deliver some of the highlights.

• The NFB reached an agreement with Amazon.com, as Target uses the Amazon.com engine. The agreement covers third-parties, such as Target.
• Amazon has an Accessibility Committee?
• The agreement is posted as a scanned PDF on the NFB site – Irony abounds . . .
• Apparently, there is a new assistive technology called “screen-access software”. I’ve never heard of it, but apparently this is how a screen-reader is being referred as in the NFB-Amazon agreement.
• Amazon.com promises “full and complete access by the blind”. Is that truly accessible though? What about everyone else that may simply need ZoomText or just larger fonts and not have the code blow up? Why is accessibility only defined by blindness?
• Joe specifically asks whether or not this action will result in the outdated, nested tables, invalid CSS, and abundance of JavaScript will be replaced with valid and semantically correct code that is built using progressive enhancement, or will provide graceful degradation into other devices.

Good questions.

What an amazing opportunity to create a fully CSS compliant site that will be fully accessible and interoperable, regardless of device. I could use Amazon.com on my mobile phone or any other device besides a browser if that were possible. When will these companies realize the business case for accessibility? The more people that can access your site, the more potential customers you will have. Especially as mobile browsing increases, interoperability and degrading gracefully will be critical to success.

Accessibility, in the most liberal definition of the word, is just smart business.

The World Wide Web is significant because of the boundaries it traverses. The web places the opportunity to buy from, learn from or interact with companies outside your neighborhood, your state, or your country right at your fingertips. This is a fantastic opportunity for everybody, and the nature of the medium means that it can be accessible to people with any range of physical or cognitive impairments.

Laws, of course, are designed to be regional.

It’s inevitable, then, that an accessibility question would eventually cross international boundaries. The question is whether a company with no literal presence within a country can be held liable in that country due to an issue of website access. A tribunal in the United Kingdom has recently ruled just that — determining that a computer-based exam which was not accessible was in violation of the UK’s Disability Discrimination Act.

The summary of the situation is that a blind woman working for Proctor and Gamble in the UK elected to study for a specialized internationally-recognized qualification as a Project Management Professional (PMP.) This qualification is managed by a not-for-profit corporation in the United States, the Project Management Institute (PMI.) This institute made the study materials for the examination and the examination itself marginally accessible, which did allow the woman to complete and even pass the examination, but only by enduring unusual and burdensome challenges.

Sam Latif, the blind woman in question, began proceedings against PMI for discrimination under the Disabilities Discrimination Act.

The crux of the matter is whether the employment interactions took place in Great Britain or in the United States. It’s PMI’s position that the entire process took place in the United States, where they are located. MS. Latif takes the position that the acts which were discriminatory took place in the United Kingdom.

Clearly, it’s a tricky issue - but the core element is extremely significant. Web accessibility may be an issue on which you could be in violation of the laws of any country you do business in.

Struan Robertson, a technology lawyer with Pinsent Masons is quoted in the article at Out-Law.com saying:

“A blind person in the UK could argue a right to sue a US company in a UK court for discrimination if the US company has a website that is not accessible to him and he can show that that US company has taken orders from other UK consumers,” he said. “The Tribunal’s reasoning could be influential on a court, though it won’t be binding.”

No binding legal decision has been made, but the possibilities are tremendous. You may not be able to rest easy having made a website which only meets the standards of your own country: you must consider a much broader range of possibilities.

As it stands, PMI is appealing the ruling with the Employment Appeals Tribunal. Interestingly, they are not appealing the question of jurisdiction — they are instead only appealing the ruling that the adjustments which they did provide were insufficient. On this point, there is some chance they could win their case. If they feel particularly that their chance of winning on this point is strong, it could be that they didn’t consider the jurisdiction question to be worth pursuing.

However you look at the situation, the question is very important. Web business is absolutely and unflinchingly international - and that international market suggests a wide variety of new legal considerations to take into account in your site development.

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.”

No matter where your political feeling may lie, there is no doubt that our troops are among the finest in the world. They deserve our thanks and support for their sacrifices.

Those who suggest that these soldiers are less intelligent or unable to gain regular jobs show their ignorance. Being a veteran myself, I served with many intelligent, hard-working, and dedicated people, who just happened to be soldiers as well. These brave men and women are deserving of our respect and admiration, as they and their tradition are the reason that we have the freedoms that we enjoy.
When I found out about this organization, I had to bring it to light here at the Accessibility Blog. It is called Project Valour-IT.

Project Valour-IT stands for Voice Activated Laptops for our Injured Troops. This organization is attempting to purchase and install accessibility software for wounded troops. The majority of accessibklity software is voice recognition software, as many of the wounded have suffered hand and arm injuries, or have an amputated limb. This organization wants to get this technology to the Soldiers, Airmen, Sailors and Marines recovering at home or in military hospitals.

As of October 2006, Valour-IT has distributed nearly 600 laptops to severely wounded soldiers across the country. Here’s how it started:

Project Valour-IT began when Captain Charles “Chuck” Ziegenfuss was wounded by an IED while serving as commander of a tank company in Iraq in June 2005.As he began to recover, CPT Ziegenfuss wanted to return to writing his blog, but serious hand injuries hampered his typing. When a loyal and generous reader gave him a copy of the Dragon Naturally Speaking Preferred software, other readers began to realize how important such software could be to CPT Ziegenfuss’ fellow wounded soldiers and started cast about for a way to get it to them.

A fellow blogger (blog author) who writes under the pseudonym FbL contacted Captain Ziegenfuss and the two realized they shared a vision of creating libraries of laptops with voice-controlled software that could be brought to the bedsides of wounded soldiers whose injuries prevented them from operating a standard computer. FbL contacted Soldiers’ Angels, who offered to help develop the project, and Project Valour-IT was born.

If you are interested in donating or supporting this cause, I urge you to go to the Project Valour-IT site and see some of the stories of soldiers that have been helped by this great charity.

Dr. T.V. Raman posted to the Official Google Blog yesterday, explaining audio CAPTCHA’s and Google’s policy. While explaining the need to be accessible, he also asks for user feedback on the current methods being used by Google. (A trademark action by Google - getting user feedback)

Here’s your chance to let your voice be heard. Help Dr. Raman improve the accessibility at Google!