Skip to main content

Home/ Web Accessibility/ Group items tagged vision

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Sandra Earl

Digital Web Magazine - Understanding Disabilities when Designing a Website - 0 views

  • In the UK In the US 2m people have a vision impairment3 10m people have a vision impairment4 8.2m people have mild to moderate deafness5, 688,000 people have severe to profound deafness6 28m people have a hearing impairment7 3.4m people have a physical disability8 8m people have a physical disability9 1.5m people have a learning disability10 6.8m people have a learning disability11 6m people have dyslexia12 25m people have dyslexia13
  • Most people who are blind will rely on screen reading software such as
  • JAWS or Windows-Eyes
  • ...41 more annotations...
  • refreshable Braille device which converts the text on the website into Braille.
  • Place form instructions before the form field
  • To improve accessibility and usability for screen reader users, form field requirements must be placed before the form field itself.
  • Provide a ‘skip to main content’ link Screen reader users benefit from a ‘skip to main content’ link as it enables them to jump over lengthy navigation to the main content of the web page, reducing the amount of content they have to listen to.
  • Ensure link text is descriptive Screen reader users using software such as JAWS can listen to the links on a web page through functionality known as a links list. If link text is not descriptive—solely using phrases such as “click here” or “more information”, for example—there is no way for screen reader users to determine where the link will take them.
  • Provide descriptive web page titles The first piece of information a screen reader user will listen to when they open a web page is the <title> assigned to the page. It is important, therefore, to use a title which reflects the content of the web page.
  • Provide descriptive headings It is important to provide descriptive headings
  • Screen reader users often listen to headings out of context from the main content
  • Provide audio descriptions and transcripts of video content Screen reader users depend on audio descriptions to provide additional information about important visual content displayed within a video.
  • Transcripts are written accounts of the video or audio content and can include additional information such as comments and descriptions
  • screen reader users cannot use a mouse
  • People with low vision will tend to use magnification software to make reading a website easier. Depending on the severity of their vision impairment, these users may combine magnification and screen reading software by using software products such as Supernova or ZoomText. For milder vision impairments, users may just increase the default size of text within their browser settings or change the colors to make the content more comfortable to read.
  • Avoid using images of text
  • Ensure text can be resized
  • Place key information in specific locations of the screen
  • ebsite search functionality is often located in the top-right corner of the web page
  • Juicy Studio color contrast analyzer.
  • it is possible to determine whether the colors chosen meet the minimum requirements specified in the WCAG Guidelines.
  • People with a hearing impairment tend not to use assistive software to improve their web browsing experience. Instead, they rely on the website being accessible by providing any audio content in alternative formats, such as captioning or transcripts.
  • By making audio content accessible for users with a hearing impairment, it also makes the content accessible for other users who find themselves in an environment where audio cannot be heard.
  • library with the sound turned down; they may be in a noisy environment where it is difficult to hear the audio; or they may be using a computer without speakers.
  • Provide captions for any video content
  • Provide transcripts of the spoken audio Where content is spoken without video, such as in a podcast, it is important to provide a transcript. It is recommended that the transcript be provided in plain accessible HTML to allow access by the widest possible audience, as opposed to a Microsoft Word or Adobe PDF document.
  • Physical disabilities range in severity from those who are temporarily disabled, for example having a broken arm, to those who are quadriplegic and have no use of any limbs. Depending on the severity of the physical disability, these users may access websites through voice recognition software such as Dragon Naturally Speaking.
  • However, what all users with a physical disability have in common is limited or no ability to use a mouse. This means that content within the website that requires a mouse click or fine motor control cannot be accessed by these users.
  • Ensure all content can be accessed via the keyboard
  • Users with a physical disability will have limited or no ability to use a mouse and as such will navigate websites using the keyboard.
  • Provide a focus state for links
  • Provide visible skip links Skip links are links that become visible when they receive focus, and are helpful for users with a physical disability. Keyboard users must tab through the web page to reach the particular link they are interested in—skip links allow lengthy navigation to be bypassed and reduce the number of key presses required to activate links in the main content.
  • Avoid moving targets Avoid using moving targets such as tickers, as users with a physical disability can find them very difficult to use.
  • Provide large clickable areas
  • provide sufficient whitespace between links
  • People with a cognitive or learning disability may have difficulties with memory, problem solving, perception, and conceptualization. In addition, people with a learning disability may have issues with reading and comprehension such as dyslexia.
  • To enhance the usability of the website for these users it is important that content is written in plain English, page layouts are simple in design, navigation is clear and consistent and there is no moving content to impede comprehension.
  • Provide the same look and feel throughout all pages of the website. Ensure that the navigation and main content are located in the same area of every page. Additionally, consider color coding different sections within the website. Users with cognitive or learning disabilities tend to find it easier to navigate around sections which are color coded.
  • Provide a site map A site map will enable users with a cognitive or learning disability to have a clear idea of the breadth of content contained within the website. The site map also enables users to directly access any page on the website, and helps if the user becomes lost.
  • Use a resizable sans-serif font which is left-aligned To increase readability for users with a cognitive or learning disability, use a sans-serif font which can be resized. Additionally, left-align content—justified text is more difficult to read due to the uneven spacing between words. Italicized and capitalized text should also be kept to a minimum to aid readability.
  • Provide helpful error messages
  • Offer speech output Organizations such as Browse Aloud and Textic enable content from a website to be spoken when highlighting the words on a web page. Offering this functionality is especially helpful for users who find it difficult to read large amounts of text.
  • Provide an Easy Read Version Consider providing an ‘easy read’ version of complex content. This combines plain text with images to aid understanding of the information. For an example of an easy read document see the Department of Health’s Making Lives Better for People with a Learning Disability.
  • Provide different color schemes People with cognitive or learning disabilities may benefit from different color scheme options. It is helpful if an easy read scheme such as a lemon background with dark text, and a hi-viz scheme such as a black background with yellow text, are provided.
Sandra Earl

untitled - 0 views

  • The upsurge in VoiceOver could be explained in part by iPhone now providing VoiceOver support; all of a sudden there is a very real reason to switch to Mac if you can use a screen reader you are familiar with on both your desktop and mobile.
  • The upsurge in VoiceOver could be explained in part by iPhone now providing VoiceOver support; all of a sudden there is a very real reason to switch to Mac if you can use a screen reader you are familiar with on both your desktop and mobile.
  • It’s good to also see the free, open source NVDA on the up. They’ve worked hard to include WAI-ARIA support and are becoming a key tool for web developers when testing.
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • We’re still faced with one massive problem with mobile access however and that’s the lack of an open, cross platform accessibility API that mobile screen readers can hook into. On desktop we have IAccessible2, MSAA and UI Automation (amongst others) but on mobile users are tied into one platform often only supporting one browser (such as iPhone, Blackberry RIM and others) so while desktop has opened up we find ourselves in a 1990’s type impasse with users left with little room to choose on mobile. Opera works well with VoiceOver but we have no way of telling if it works on the iPhone as it’s not supported. My hope is that with more users there’ll be more momentum behind breaking this stand off and opening up the market and ultimately giving users not only choice but portability between platforms.
  • It’s good to also see the free, open source NVDA on the up. They’ve worked hard to include WAI-ARIA support and are becoming a key tool for web developers when testing.
  • « Yay factor! Going global with standards and BBC Click on web accessibility Make video accessible, localised, mobile and searchable by captioning » Screen reader software usage shifts on desktop and mobile Nov 4th, 2009 by iheni WebAim released their 2009 Screen Reader Survey last week, a follow up from last years Screen Reader survey. Very good reading it makes too but of particular interest are results around screen reader choice on the desktop and increased screen reader access on mobile. For years it’s felt like screen reader users have mainly used IE on the desktop in combination with the major screen readers Jaws by Freedom Scientific and WindowEyes by GW Micro. It’s not that other platforms don’t support screen readers (we have Orca on Linux, VoiceOver on Mac) it’s just that IE seems to have dominated. As such what types of content and web technologies users can and can’t access has very much been driven by what the three software vendors Microsoft, Freedom Scientific and GW Micro have supported. This has made access to the open web a bit lopsided cutting down on choice for the end user, competition and by extension innovation. SVG is an example of a web technology that has possibly suffered by not being supported by IE and in turn by Jaws and WindowEyes. What’s interesting to see in this year’s survey is that Jaws and WindowEyes – while still the most used – have some stiff competition at snapping at their heels from open source, free screen readers (NVDA and  SAToGo ) and VoiceOver which is available with Mac: JAWS 75.2% Window Eyes 23.5% VoiceOver 14.6% System Access or System Access To Go 22.3% NVDA 25.6% While this year’s stats show little shift for Jaws and WindowEyes usage overall there is a significant leap forward for NVDA (NonVisual Desktop Access) and VoiceOver: Of the 1121 respondents, 74% use JAWS, 23% use Window-Eyes, 8% use NVDA, and 6% use VoiceOver. While several other screen readers were reported, these were the most prominently reported. The upsurge in VoiceOver could be explained in part by iPhone now providing VoiceOver support; all of a sudden there is a very real reason to switch to Mac if you can use a screen reader you are familiar with on both your desktop and mobile. This could also explain the increase of screen reader users on mobile reported this year with 53% of survey respondents with disabilities confirming they use a screen reader on a mobile device. This is up from 12% last year (although last year’s survey doesn’t distinguish disabled from non-disabled users). I wonder how much this is to do with the ‘iPhone Factor’ but also can’t help thinking that social networking has done for the mobile web what Kylie Minogue did for Agent Provocateur – everybody wants some. And for me at least 2009 feels like the year that we all sat up and paid attention to the potential of mobile for people with disabilities. We’re still faced with one massive problem with mobile access however and that’s the lack of an open, cross platform accessibility API that mobile screen readers can hook into. On desktop we have IAccessible2, MSAA and UI Automation (amongst others) but on mobile users are tied into one platform often only supporting one browser (such as iPhone, Blackberry RIM and others) so while desktop has opened up we find ourselves in a 1990’s type impasse with users left with little room to choose on mobile. Opera works well with VoiceOver but we have no way of telling if it works on the iPhone as it’s not supported. My hope is that with more users there’ll be more momentum behind breaking this stand off and opening up the market and ultimately giving users not only choice but portability between platforms.
  • We’re still faced with one massive problem with mobile access however and that’s the lack of an open, cross platform accessibility API that mobile screen readers can hook into.
  •  
    "We're still faced with one massive problem with mobile access however and that's the lack of an open, cross platform accessibility API that mobile screen readers can hook into."
Vernon Fowler

Responsive Design is Too Responsive? - 0 views

  • When you use browser zoom in Webkit browsers (Chrome and Safari), all elements on the page increase in size and start overlapping content. This is because WebKit browsers zoom to make the content bigger but the width of the browser remains unaffected, which means it doesn’t trigger responsive style sheet elements or address layout issues.
  • This is an accessibility issue as users with vision deficiencies use browser zoom to navigate websites. If they use Google Chrome they will have a lot of issues accessing content.
Vernon Fowler

NV Access - 0 views

  •  
    "NVDA (NonVisual Desktop Access) is a free "screen reader" which enables blind and vision impaired people to use computers. It reads the text on the screen in a computerised voice. You can control what is read to you by moving the cursor to the relevant area of text with a mouse or the arrows on your keyboard."
Sandra Earl

E-Access Blog » Blog Archive » People With Impaired Vision 'Less Likely To Be... - 0 views

  • The RNIB report finds people over 55 are three times more likely to have seeing difficulties as those in the 16-24 age bracket, which is a greater increase with age than with other kinds of disabilities.
  • In addition, the report finds that people who are disabled with seeingdifficulties are less likely to be employed (48 per cent) than those with other kinds of disability (50 per cent); this compares to an overall employment rate of 75 per cent among people of working age. For people with more than one disability, the employment rate drops to 38 per cent, however for people with ’seeing difficulties’ that do not constitute a disability the rate is much higher at 83 per cent. The unemployment rates are 8 per cent for disabled people as a whole but 13 per cent for those disabled by visual impairment. In contrast, the report also found that a higher than average proportion of visually impaired disabled people are employed in high-level positions.
Sandra Earl

zomigi.com » Why browser zoom shouldn't kill flexible layouts - 0 views

  • Liquid layouts get rid of the dreaded horizontal scrollbar
  • Liquid layouts allow you to make full use of the area available in the viewport, showing more or less content, depending on what will fit at any given moment.
  • Liquid layouts essentially allow users to choose the line length, or number of text characters per line of text, that is most comfortable for them to read.
  • ...1 more annotation...
  • If you have images that you think the user will want to get a closer look at, you can choose to scale only these images using easy CSS tricks. You can set up your images and CSS in such a way that the images will have little distortion or blurriness when scaled dynamically by the browser. The other images can all remain a constant size, so that they don’t get in the way of users with very large text and contribute to horizontal scrollbars, float drops, or other nasty things that can happen when you put huge images into web pages. And of couse, if a user does want to scale one of the non-scalable images, they can always use the browser zoom function as a backup method.
Vernon Fowler

Introduction to Web Accessibility - Course - 0 views

  •  
    "Introduction to Web Accessibility is an online course that introduces tools and techniques for web developers to easily ensure that websites are more accessible to users who are blind or have low vision."
Sandra Earl

Introduction to screen readers and screen magnifiers | 456 Berea Street - 0 views

  • And that leads me to three great videos posted on the Yahoo! User Interface Blog: In Introduction to Screen Readers, Yahoo! engineer Victor Tsaran talks about who will be likely to use a screen reader, how screen readers work, and how they can be used to interact with the computer desktop and to browse web sites. In Introduction to Screen Magnifiers, Karo Caran shows how the screen magnifier ZoomText is used to make the computer desktop and web sites readable to people with reduced vision. And finally, in From the Mouth of a Screenreader, Doug Geoffray from GW Micro (Window-Eyes vendor) talks about the history of screen reading software and how they analyse what is displayed on the screen in order to speak it to the user.
Sandra Earl

WebAIM: Screen Reader Survey Results - 0 views

  • We received 1121 valid responses to the screen reader survey, which was conducted Dec. 2008 - Jan. 2009.
  • Skip to content22% Skip to main content28%
  • 33 respondents (2.9%) reported being both deaf and blind.
  • ...33 more annotations...
  • Please rate your computer proficiency Response% of Respondents Expert22% Advanced44% Intermediate27% Beginner8%
  • Please rate your screen reader proficiency Response% of Respondents Expert17% Advanced41% Intermediate32% Beginner9%
  • Screen Reader Usage
  • Of the 1121 respondents, 74% use JAWS, 23% use Window-Eyes, 8% use NVDA, and 6% use VoiceOver. While several other screen readers were reported, these were the most prominently reported. Individual versions of screen readers are not yet computed, but generally the majority of users are using the most up-to-date version of their screen reader.
  • How soon do you update your screen reader after a new version is released? Upgrade Window% of Respondents Immediately41% First 6 months25% 6-12 months9% 1-2 years9% 2-3 years4% 3+ years6% No response6%
  • How customized are your screen reader settings? (e.g., changed verbosity, installed scripts, etc.) Response% of Respondents A lot29% Somewhat40% Slightly21% Not at all7% No response4%
  • a lot or some customization was reported by only 27.6% of respondents with no disability versus 71.4% for those that reported blindness.
  • 78% of respondents reported using a screen reader on a desktop computer, 54% use a screen reader on a laptop, and 12% use a screen reader on a mobile phone.
  • No respondents who use screen readers for evaluation reported using a screen reader on a mobile device.
  • Which web browser(s) do you currently use with a screen reader? Browser% of Respondents IE633% IE768% IE82% Firefox39% Safari6%
  • Respondents with no disability were nearly twice as likely to list Firefox as blind respondents - 66% to 37%.
  • The percentage of Safari users is over double that of the overall population - this may be due in part to the fact that some in the Mac community actively solicited survey participation and encouraged respondents to indicate their Safari use, perhaps partially due to feeling snubbed because we didn't list them with IE and Firefox as direct choices.
  • When first accessing a new, unfamiliar home page, I'm most likely to... Response% of Respondents Read through the home page46% Navigate through or listen to the links on the page35% Use the Search to find what I'm looking for13% Look for a site map or site index3% No Response2%
  • Interestingly, the more proficient screen reader users are more likely to read through the home page and use links less often than less proficient screen reader users. This may be due to faster reading speeds for more experienced users. The home page strategies used were very similar regardless of proficiency, disability, or amount of screen reader use.
  • I use "skip to content" or "skip navigation" links... Response% of Respondents Whenever they're available22% Often16% Sometimes28% Seldom19% Never10% No Response4%
  • Some questions were of a technical nature and we understand that many participants may not have been very technically savvy. Responses may also be based upon user experiences with web content that is generally inaccessible. We cannot help but wonder if responses may have been different if screen reader interactions with web content were typically very positive.
  • I use Access keys... Response% of Respondents Whenever they're available22% Often16% Sometimes28% Seldom19% Never10%
  • I navigate by headings... Response% of Respondents Whenever they're available52% Often24%
  • 76% always or often navigating by headings when they are available.
  • I use site search functionality... Response% of Respondents Whenever it's available26% Often25% Sometimes31%
  • Find the word "Search"18% Jump to the first text/edit field on the page25%
  • Jump to the first form element in a page36%
  • Proficient screen reader users were more than twice as likely to jump directly to the form or text/edit field than less proficient users. Less proficient users were nearly three times more likely to use more manual methods (reading, tabbing, or finding) than more proficient users.
  • a majority of respondents seldom or never use site maps. There was no marked difference in the use of site maps across screen reader proficiency or disability. In general, it appears that site maps may be beneficial, but are not commonly accessed by screen reader users.
  • Text-only versions are always used by many and never used by many. As such, it is very difficult to interpret the value they have for screen reader users. More proficient screen reader users were much less likely to use text-only versions than less proficient users. This may suggest that proficient users employ sufficient techniques to render the main version acceptable to them. Or, it may suggest that proficient users do not gain value in using text-only versions, which are often less than optimal.
  • If content is identified as being "for screen reader users", how often do you use it? Response% of Respondents Whenever it's available38% Often15% Sometimes25% Seldom13%
  • A closer analysis, however, reveals that pop-up windows are reported as very difficult twice as often by less proficient screen reader users than with higher proficiency. Alternatively, more proficient users were three times more likely to indicate that pop-up windows are not at all difficult. This shows that less proficient screen reader users (which represent 41% of respondents) have more difficult experiences with pop-up windows.
  • Firefox users were much more likely to give a favorable response, perhaps a reflection of Firefox support for ARIA, etc. Evaluators and those without disabilities were nearly twice as likely to indicate that these applications are not very or not at all accessible than those that always use screen readers or have disabilities. This may suggest that these applications are actually more accessible than evaluators believe them to be, or alternatively, that screen reader users with disabilities are less knowledgeable about the true inaccessibility of these technologies.
  • 66% of evaluators preferred that the image be ignored, compared to only 28% of those that always user a screen reader. Similarly, 65% of those with no disability preferred that the image be ignored, compared to 29% of those with disabilities.
  • If a web page contains a photo of the White House, I prefer that the image be identified as... Response% of Respondents Photo of the White House80%
  • 69.4% of evaluators found them difficult compared to only 42.6% of those that always use a screen reader. Those with higher screen reader proficiency naturally found these links easier.
  • 71.5% of screen reader users reported that Flash is difficult
  • While the majority (58%) of users reported that frames are easy, those that are blind were 3 1/2 times more likely to indicate that they are easy than those with no disability. Similarly, those that always use a screen reader reported frames as easy nearly 3 times more often than evaluators. This perhaps suggests a misconception among those that do not have disabilities that frames are very inaccessible when in fact those with disabilities find them easy.
Vernon Fowler

WCAG 2.1 is Coming-and Here's What You Should Know Right Now - Siteimprove - 0 views

  • Expect the new WCAG standards to emphasize a mobile experience that matches what users might expect from a traditional browsing session. This will likely include making your site’s touch screen functions more compatible with assistive technology. 
  • The new standards are expected to raise that level to 400% to help users with low vision navigate sites more smoothly.
  • WCAG 2.1 will likely seek to place limits on where and when pop-ups and similar advertising can appear. 
  • ...1 more annotation...
  • For users with motor skill issues, clicking on incorrect links and buttons is a common problem. WCAG 2.1 will likely require improvements in navigation technology that makes it easier both to find the right link and to correct actions if the wrong link is clicked. 
  •  
    Considering how massively the online landscape has changed in the past decade, it's amazing that international standards for web accessibility haven't been updated since December of 2008. That's about to change. After soliciting and assessing recommendations from the public, the international Web Accessibility Initiative is set to announce version 2.1 of its Web Content Accessibility Guidelines in the middle of this year. As that update draws nearer, there are a few key changes website owners may want to start planning for. (Keep in mind that all WCAG 2.1 changes are tentative.)
1 - 20 of 20
Showing 20 items per page