Web Site Accessibility Blog

Courtesy: Good Experience Blog

The number one reason to build an accessible website (or to be accessible, no matter what the subject): You lose money, and potential customers have bad experiences.

Good Experience Blog shows an experience at Bloomingdales when a father with a stroller asks a store clerk if there is an elevator. The clerk replies: “No. There’s an escalator over there.”

Why is this customer experience broken? Let me count the the ways.

• Bloomingdale’s, a major retailer spread across many floors, has only one elevator accessible from its Lexington Avenue entrance.

• The clerk, upon seeing a customer in need, suggests an irrelevant solution and then goes back to work.

• There is no acknowledgment that this is an inconvenience - not the clerk, not even the sign. Customers who can’t climb stairs or stand on an escalator - customers in wheelchairs, parents with strollers - are just out of luck.

This could be humorous, if it weren’t so despicable and thoughtless:

A wheelchair ramp goes to a landing with more stairs at a courthouse in St. Petersburg, Florida. Unfortunately, I have experienced these types of situations with family members who have been in wheelchairs.

How many websites do you know of that provide just enough accessibility to get to the inaccessible features?

I had the privilege of attending accessibility testing for an enterprise-level software application and found some interesting issues that are not typical to many projects. Actual user testing is strange like that – dealing with humans brings out all of the random factors.

First Issue: User Interaction with JAWS

One of the testers was a diabetic. She was blind and used Jaws, she also suffered from carpel-tunnel-like symptoms, called trigger finger. The tendons in her hands were shortening and becoming increasingly inflexible, which happens to many diabetics. Her hands were scarred from multiple surgeries on those tendons. The issue I observed was that some of the keystrokes combinations were very difficult for her to perform. Certain hand movements were difficult, slightly painful, but it was a surprise to find an unintended consequence to key combinations.

This became more of a JAWS issue for her navigation. She relied on simple keystroke commands, but the application required her to use some complex commands, which were difficult. This became a case of evaluating the controls and how it could be made easier for accommodation.

Second Issue: JAWS familiarity

Most accessibility issues could be overcome by improving the level of JAWS familiarity. Many JAWS users have a basic level of JAWS interaction, enough to get them where they want to go. However, this application will require specific JAWS training for internal employees. There are many functions in the application that are much easier to manage with a high level of JAWS expertise. We found that most JAWS users have the necessary understanding for navigating documents and the web, but they like learning new methods of improving their experience.

The advanced JAWS users were more able to cope with troubleshooting, navigating new and unfamiliar applications, pages, and accomplishing the specific testing goals. The added familiarity supplemented their toolset of resources in dealing with unfamiliar web pages. The accessibility of any system improves with the level of knowledge of the JAWS user.

Third issue: Usability v Accessibility

The developers of this software application tested many methods of improving accessibility. Each option was tested and evaluated. However, in the actual user testing the JAWS users expected certain behaviors, such as error handling, which were typical of using the web in combination with Internet Explorer and JAWS. When those specific events were improved in the application, the users were not pleased with the different behavior. Even though the application was more accessible, the users did not expect the more accessible behavior. They were used to overcoming the obstacles of poor accessibility and expected that behavior. Because they expected something different, they were not prepared for the more accessible method, and some actually preferred the less-accessible behaviors.

This is one case where expectancy, a key component of usability, affected the judgment of users in using a new system. The developers now had a dilemma of keeping the more accessible code, which improved many functions, or to change the code back to the typical less-accessible counterpart, simply because users were used to the issues that they typically cope with.

Fourth Issue: Vendor Claims

Here is where I can rant for days. Software applications that claim to be “accessible” but really aren’t. And usually, there isn’t even a good case that could be made for the “accessible” claim. Because a screen reader can toss out a few works? How can you describe your product as accessible when you don’t even use proper markup of page elements, frames, and critical navigation items?

As an example, this software produces reports that are navigated across multiple frames. The frameset lacks any <noframe> descriptions, so the user only has the title of each frame, which is barely descriptive. The main navigation is a tree structure that has no labels or descriptions, and the only method to expand the tree navigation is mouse-dependant. The navigation labels in the actual report lacked any sort of descriptive text. “Void” was the label for the print function. Many other labels were non-existed, misleading or simply absent.

This is accessible? How can you possible claim to be an accessible product when your application does not even take the simplest steps for accessible mark-up?

This last issue was the one that made me the angriest. The vendor of this application is seemingly unimpressed with the customer’s repeated requests for an actual accessible product. They simply seem to shrug their shoulders and claim that it is “accessible” when it is clearly unacceptable. It makes me wonder how this claim can be made and if there are any laws being broken. I am also sure that many vendors make the claim of being accessible without even understanding what accessible means, much less having the user testing to back it up.

What I learned

Even the best programming cannot account for human accessibility and usability testing. testing is critical to developing any site or application, as there will be many factors that were simply not considered, but will increase the effectiveness of the end product. My favorite part of the testing was the interaction and conversations with each of the testers. I enjoyed getting to know them, their stories, and their opinions about website accessibility. I feel as though I learned more from these amazing people than any book could have contained.

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.

A partnership between the BBC and AbilityNet, a computing and disability charity, created My Web, My Way. The site offers users many ways to make the web more accessible by using their current PC or Mac and multiple operating systems. By listing shortcuts, systems settings, browser settings and helpful information, users are able to increase their accessibility by simply using the features available in most operating systems.

Users start by selecting their Operating system, and then choices based on the OS are presented in a very understandable manner. Users choosing the Windows OS, are then presented with choices of;

• Help seeing websites
• Help hearing websites
• Help reading websites
• Help with keyboard and mouse
• Help with web forms

Each selection allows the user to get specific information on managing each aspect of increasing text size, enabling speech, changing colors and even creating customized style sheets. Each specific section links out to relevant supporting resources.

Any user who wants to increase their enjoyment and interaction with the web should take full advantage of this resource. The BBC and AbilityNet have done a superb job of developing this site, which is very easy to use and understand. The descriptions are clear and the icons are relevant and helpful, the content is written clearly and users should be able to easily update their computers to enable better access to web resources.

This must be IBM’s week. Starting on October 3, 2005, IBM is giving away accessibility software on its website. While some are 90-day trials, and the license cost is certainly affordable. The offerings include:

Keyboard Optimizer: An application that monitors a user’s typing patterns and optimizes for mistakes. This is geared for those situations where users may not be able to lift fingers quickly from the keys.
Mouse Smoothing Software: for users with hand tremors or difficulty moving a mouse.

In addition to these user technologies, IBM is also offering applications ands software for programmers, These are designed to allow development companies increase their accessibility reach by using some very unique products.

I’ve downloaded the aDesigner software program, and I’m sure that I’ll be posting a review of it soon. This software allows programmers to view their site in different vision and blind user modes. The advantage is for designers to actually see what the user sees in the design aspect, rather than reading text-based reporting or line corrections from standard accessibility code testing.

I’m back from a restful vacation. Of course, I had the best of intentions to make an entry or two while on the beach, but, you know how that goes. Anyhow, back to business . . .

While on vacation, I read a book that was sort of for business, but mainly for curiosity, Paco Underhill’s Why We Buy: The Science of Shopping. This was one of the most fascinating books I’ve read in the past few years. While it briefly touches on Web sites and Internet marketing, I felt there were a lot of crossover ideas for both on and off-line retail. It was amazing as methods of signage, store and product layout, dressing room decor, the impact of males shopping with or without females, and other elements that surround our shopping experience.

In one of the chapters, Underhill goes into detail about the aging Baby Boomer generation, and how retailers will be forced to change their marketing, packaging, sales techniques and methods of reaching this economically powerful group. He cites research that shows how vision weakens as we grow older.

“Human eyes begin to falter at about age forty, and even healthy ones are usually impaired by their sixties. With age, three main ocular events take place: The lens becomes more rigid and the muscles holding it weaken, meaning you can’t focus on small type; the cornea yellows, which changes how you perceive color, and less light reaches your retina, meaning the world looks a little dimmer than it once did. The issue of visual acuity, already a major one in the marketplace, will become even more critical-not just in some far-off future, but from this moment on.”

Underhill goes on to show how newspapers have had endless user surveys, all of which have shown that readers are not happy with the small text size used in newspaper print, yet the established news organization refuse to change. Newspaper print uses body text of 9-point type, a typical paperback is in 11.75-point, and most readers prefer 12-point or larger. Any wonder newspaper subscriptions rates have never grown since the late 70’s? Giving users control of the text they see on the web page will become critical. However, I advocate designing pages with larger text from the beginning, rather than forcing people to search or hinder their progress.

The yellowing of the cornea is something that was new to me, yet the implications are critical, as subtle color differences are not easily perceived. The difference between blue and green becomes difficult to perceive and everything tends to look yellow. Contrasting text and images on a web page is an important part of maintaining a friendly relationship with your users. Avoid text and images that cause users to make an effort to see and understand. Clear contrast will help navigation, comprehension and ease of use.

A fifty-year-old’s retinas allow about 1/4 less light than a twenty-year-old’s. This means that sites should not use darker colors if it intends to reach an older audience. A younger audience will be able to distinguish slight variations in color, and may be able to read that blue text on a black background, but forget trying to reach anyone other than that twenty-year-old audience. Older shoppers and web users prefer brighter, lighter sites that allow them to easily see the page and the graphic elements.

I highly recommend this book, Why We Buy: The Science of Shopping. Even if you only focus on the internet, it is a study of human nature. Now I find that I can’t go into a store without evaluating how effective it has placed the signage or allows traffic flow. When you classify how people show, it falls under two categories, needs and wants. Shopping for needs is something that we all have to do. Shopping for wants is a social hobby. Both have the element of impulse buying, which drives our economy. However, I do feel that people shop, ultimately, for discovery. Finding something that you certainly didn’t intend to buy, but you become enraptured with the idea of having it. Buying it is a formality, once you’ve found it – it’s yours.

While on vacation, I went into one of my favorite stores, the Newport Army-Navy Store. It is an old store, and it has been there for along time. You walk in and the first thing you sense is the smell of old wood. The shop is right on the harbor front and wood takes on a unique, rich smell, especially in this old shopping district. I’ve visited this store at least once every year since I was eight - nothing has changed in almost thirty years. The items are crammed into shelves ten feet tall and you have to move, touch and feel your way through the shirts, shoes, canteens, and OD green canvas bags until you discover something you just can’t live without.

Me? I found a great pair of black Chuck Taylor Converse high-tops that are making me re-live my childhood.

IBM is donating 50,000 lines of code to Mozilla’s Firefox project, which will enable FireFox v1.5 to offer enhanced accessibility features. The technology will allow for page magnification within the browser, automatic page narration, and keyboard navigation. These features will enhance the user experience for users with visual or motor disabilities.

The code will enable users to access these features without installing any additional software or plug-ins. According to the article, IBM has already helped FireFox with the support for Microsoft’s Active Accessibility, which is the industry standard for screen-reader technology.

As an avid FireFox user – I really love this announcement. It creates competition; competition creates innovation, which makes better products. I like this relationship and where it is heading. This isn’t so much of an anti-Microsoft happiness that I have, but a win-win for users that will benefit from this move.

Assistive Technologies for the Arab World
Nattiq Technologies, located in Dubai, is a leader of assistive technology to the Arab world. The upcoming GITEX, held in Cairo, Egypt, Nattiq will display their assistive technology in the Arab world. With their software, Hal SuperNova, this uses Windows Media Player to allow blind users to work with multimedia devices, such as TV’s & DVD recorders. They also offer a Pocket Ha which makes a PDA accessible by reading everything on the screen. Nattiq estimated that there are over 6 million blind Arabs in the Middle East, and has developed Arab OCR technology which allows document scanning and reading, which enables any book to be a “talking book�?. There are also technologies displayed that enable talking cell phones, which also allow blind users to use a cell phone independently and privately.

Cell Phones & PDA’s
The cell phone talking technology is one that I am interested in seeing soon. It seems, as devices get smaller, they become more unusable by people with blindness or low vision. I realized this the other day as I was attempting to set up a BlackBerry. Any user with a vision or physical need would have difficulty using this device. PDA’s are the same, as they rely totally upon vision prompts and the stylus to use the device.

While personal electronic devices to get smaller, I am surprised that manufacturers are also leaving out greater amounts of the market by creating devices that only teens with small fingers can operate. Why not design for the greatest available market? Creating a smaller device that is totally accessible would also make an easier device to operate for anyone, regardless of any disability.

However, it is only video . . .

CNN is now allowing users to search video content on the web. The video content is limited-time only, as only recent segments are available. The service is pretty good and the video is very high quality.

However, there are some major accessibility hindrances. None of the video presented has subtitles, which are available when the video airs live on television. I thought the subtitles would be easily transferred to the web video, but apparently not.

To enable subtitles in Windows Media Player, if they are available: Play > Captions and Subtitles > On if Available. There are also many default languages available.

Another problem is the lack of accessibility and player controls when Microsoft’s Media Player is embedded into the page, rather than independent. WebAim studied the accessibility of multiple media players and found that embedded video has serious accessibility issues. When the player is embedded, controls are not accessible through a screen reader or through keyboard commands. When used as a stand-alone player, Windows Media Player 9 was the most accessible media player, yet all media players lose major accessibility functions when embedded.

Back to the main story, it would be nice to see subtitled content from CNN, especially knowing that these are previously broadcast stories and features. Hey – why not even present the content in an alternate text format? NPR allows users to order (what – order? – why?) transcripts of all of their broadcasts.