Slashdot Mirror
Ask an Expert About Web Site Accessibility
Joe Clark is an expert on handicapped accesibility for movies, TV, the WWW, and other media. The launch party for his new book, Building Accessible Websites , is Dec. 3, which is also the International Day of Disabled Persons, so this a perfect time to ask questions about how to make a Web site -- or a TV show or movie -- accessible. As usual, we'll send 10 of the highest-moderated questions to Joe, and run his answers verbatim when we get them back.
Macromedia Flash has integrated many accessibility features in an effort to promote development of content for special needs.
However, can we realistically try to turn any mutlimedia feature into its accessible equivalent? Is it even feasible other than providing a text-only equivalent?
The ENIAC Demo Competition
A family friend works with mentally handicapped children and teenagers, and was recently bemoaning the lack of computer equipment and software for her students. Is there any such hardware and/or software available that she doesn't know about? Are we even far enough along in our understanding of mental retardation to adequately solve this problem?
"I think you guys with quotes in your signatures should go have an original thought." -- Dan Miller
What, in your opinion, is the most common complaint concerning accessibility and web sites? In other words, if in the interests of accessibility you could encourage site owners to change only one thing about how they operate, what would it be?
So long, and thanks for all the Phish
How does Slashdot stack up? What about blog-type sites in general? What can be done on these types of sites to make them more accessible?
"... the advance of civilization is nothing but an exercise in the limiting of privacy" - Janov Pelorat
nice example right here
Be you Admins? nay, we are but lusers!
How would you handle the following criticism? For the average web site, there are more users of version 4 browsers than there are disabled users needing the latest accessible code. A table-based site can be accessible, while still accommodating the larger abled audience. Now is not the time to pursue full compliance with W3C specs.
I'm considering a starting up a web development firm with a focus on accessibility. I have good relations with the principles of an accesibility testing firm and believe the businesses can compliment each other well. I'm a part owner of a web development firm at the moment that isn't interested in pursuing this market, but I believe there is a significant market.
Can you elaborate on the market for web development firms that focus on accesibility? Aside from the normal perils of launching a new business (which I'm fairly acquainted) can you expound on the market need for firms that endeavor to deliver accessible content.
-- Solaris Central - http://w
I see that chapter 6 addresses the image problem which you state is "... a core concern in accessibility." My question is, what is your solution to data-intensive sites that display their information using graphs? For sites that have constantly changing data (stock charts for example), what solutions/tools are there to make their graphics accessible?
infested with jello like fishes no melotron wishes
Increasingly, people are using non-computer devices (cell phones, PDA's) to browse web sites. What alternative devices are disabled people using, and how are they using them in ways web developers might not have considered (e.g. voice browser in cell phone)?
Your fantasies contain the seeds of important concepts.
There are a lot of sites out there that look great in the latest Microsoft-issued browser, but decompose badly in alternative browsers such as Opera, and are completely unusable in a text-based browser such as Lynx. Sadly, the formatting that breaks down so badly is often completely unrelated to the content.
Can you give some examples of sites that have excellent content, but are rendered useless for people with disablities by presentation-level bells and whistles?
Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
Could you list the names and sources a few of the most common tool with which handicapped users would be browsing?
Also, is there anything special that webmasters should keep in mind while testing out the accessibility of their sites?
When even disabled themed sites such as The Terry Fox Foundation have flash animation and other non-accessable features, I have to wonder if we'll ever win the battle. As you can see when you read stories on sites like slashdot when stories about accessability come up, there are a large number of people who aren't just ambivilant about accessability, they are actively hostile. Will we ever get to a state when accessability is as natural as IE compatability?
I am a partially sighted person, and I have to admit that I do frequently have difficulty with accessability issues, particularly with large corporate web sites which all seem to be full-flow multimedia blitzes which require 1600x1200 resolution or higher, and usually override the default browser fonts to make them smaller.
However, there are a number of browsers, such as Mozilla (Just one example, I'm sure there are others!) which allow the user to 'zoom' the text on a page, to override colour settings etc.
Though it is undoubtedly important for Webmasters to pay great thought to the design of their sites in terms of colour, font size and multimedia content; how much relative importance should be placed on browser design, and the browsers ability to override the design decisions of the creator of a site?
Disclaimer: I meant what I thought, not what I wrote! What? You can't read my Mind? Oh dear!
There is a pdf file to download on your site but :
The PDF isn't the accessible kind. Apart from ineffectual text equivalents for each page image, there is no way to make it thus. Further, as a Macintosh user, I cannot add alternate texts using Adobe accessibility tools; all the relevant ones run on Windows only.
Is adobe grip on the market so big that you just couldnt find an alternative ? Or was it just not worth to bother since no one would have downloaded it (which is kind of the same, when I think of it) ?
What features a cross platform alternative to pdf should have from accessibility standpoint?
What do you think of the Section 508 standard? A few Govt webmasters sometimes bemoan that it doesn't allow them to use the most sexy stuff. Although if you build to 508, your site will work for just about everyone.
Do you think Section 508 is a good model for private industry to use?
The cover of this guy's Web Site Accessibility book is bizzarely reminiscent of that goatsx guy. Ugh.
http://joeclark.org/book/images/bawcover25.jpg
Do you believe, in whole or in part, that the Americans with Disabilities Act should apply to the internet (or that part of the internet (if any!) that belongs under US jurisdiction)? If so, why? If in part, what part? If not, do you see avenues other than legal ones as the best way to pursue alternative access to the internet, and what would those avenues be?
"Can't you see that everyone is buying station wagons?"
Dear Mr. Clark,
I am a web developer for the Program on Employment and Disability at the School of Industrial Labor Relations at Cornell University. Web accessibility is a serious issue for us, and we try to keep abreast of innovative approaches to design so we can find that elusive place where universal accessibility meets intelligent and aesthetically pleasing layout. We recently spoke with Cynthia Waddell (one of 8 authors of Constructing Accessible Web Sites, also out fairly recently) on this subject, but I found her unwilling to commit to anything other than 'suggestions' rather than real technical solutions.
There are two sticky issues that I have encountered. The first is the notion of universal access. Mrs. Waddell indicated that, working with the W3C, she was coming up with a list of web sites that met Priorities I-III of the W3C WAI and were still aesthetically impressive (she did not have a list ready). As you are no doubt aware, many sites that tout universal access are themselves victims of poor design -- the problem of 'yes it's W3C/WAI compliant across the board, but it's ugly as sin.' Do you believe that a site can have a single interface that is truly 'universally' accessible, or do you believe that sites should have alternate interfaces? (the web equivalent of 'do we have a ramp and stairs or just a ramp?')
Along those lines, it is apparent to me that the accessibility guidelines are designed to be useful in a manner proportional to the lobbying power of disability rights groups. That is to say, blind people and deaf people, although they comprise extraordinarily small percentages of people with disabilities, have an enormous amount of political clout when compared to people with cognitive disorders -- ADD, ADHD, Dyslexia, Autism, Schizo-affective disorder, Schizophrenia, et cetera. Because these disability groups lack the considerable power of a strong advocacy group, do you feel that they have been left by the wayside when it comes to Section 508 or WAI? (and do you personally believe that total-WAI compliance is necessary, or just Section 508?)
My apologies for several questions at once, but we take this issue very seriously here and your answers will go a long way to helping us do what we do to better suit the community that ILR serves.
Thanks so much,
Samuel W. Knowlton
Why doesn't anyone ever listen to you guys?
Seriously, I've seen TONS of studies, articles, and books on this. But I don't see many sites - even large ones - following through.
Just wait till some crappy band steals your nic.
Text to speech works fine for blind people (mostly). Deaf people can see most web content. What the heck are deaf-blind people supposed to do?
.sig).
One of the joys of Delphi, GEnie, Compuserve, etc. is that the discussion boards worked fine with simple telnet access, and braille tty's. The various web boards that have supplanted them don't seem like they would work as well (sorry, haven't tried any yet. Those braille tty's ain't cheap:)
Yes, this is a personal question (see
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon