Accessibility Experts and
Misinformation.
Introduction.
What determines an expert and what importance should be placed upon
the advice that such an “expert” may give? Unfortunately,
within the Internet communication business there is no recognizable
authority or certification process that establishes credentials or level
of expertise on any individual, group or firm within the specific field.
More often than not, credentials are established by what such an expert
does, does not do, by what they say, by what they don't say and by what
the general consensus may be as represented by their peers. Herein lies
the problem.
I am using the Paciello Group as an example and they are the focus of
this editorial. I am not questioning their reputation. I am in no position
to judge nor determine their level of reputation from first–hand
work experience with them. They do hold themselves out to be experts in
accessibility. However, my only pragmatic source for evaluation is what
they say and do within their blog postings.
Overall, I can't find fault with the value or substance of their of
overall organization as whole. That would be a significant stretch. I am
not in a position to evaluate such things.
Source: People, The
Paciello Group [EXT].
What I do take exception, and take a strong exception, is their
criticism, diversion and blatant oversight of the importance and value
of good grammar within Web content, specifically the use of punctuation.
Further exception is made to their label of misinformation, their lack
of thoroughness and that in effect they, by their own actions and critique,
have published and are promoting misinformation.
Source: How
JAWS Reads Text
[EXT].
I extend that exception to their blog as a
whole. More often than not, the Paciello Group takes on the appearance of
defending one or two adaptive technologies and then attempts to use the
technology as a basis to dictate sound accessibility practices. To me,
it brings up past issues within Internet communication, over the years,
wherein too many and too often Web content was designed exclusively for
one or two Web browsers. History points out the folly of that mess.
For the benefit of the casual reader, JAWS is an adaptive technology
software product by Freedom Scientific. This product helps those with
disabilities, primarily sight impairments, to use a computer. This
includes help with the user's ability to read and interpret Web content.
There are several products of this type within the market.
Design and development of accessible Web content is about content that
can be effectively used and interpreted by anyone and content that is not
dependent upon the individual's operating system or hardware. It is content
that should accommodate anyone whether a disability is present or not.
This is more or less a pragmatic view that takes accessibility, usability
and interoperability and has merged them into a single view.
For the record, I am not an accessibility
expert. I am just a guy who has spent some time trying to learn and solve
a complex problem, that of accessibility.
top of page
The Problem.
This editorial focuses on only one specific blog post made by the
Paciello Group.
The title of the Paciello Group's Web log [blog] post is what first
caught my attention, How JAWS reads text. The
first sentence of the post as stated on their blog page compelled further
reading of the blog entry.
Making public statements based on limited knowledge of an
assistive technology and with little understanding of how it is used,
can lead to incorrect conclusions and poor implementations.
Source: The Paciello Group Blog,
Your Accessibility Partner [EXT].
What the blog post attempts to take exception
is that Ian Hickson noted in his blog an issue wherein JAWS had a tendency,
in Hickson's experience, to create run on sentences between
paragraph elements of Web content. Hickson pointed out the use of
punctuation would prevent such a problem and that punctuation was a very
important part of creating accessible content.
Source: Ian Hickson and Punctuation
[EXT].
NOTE: I am not
defending Hickson. The guy damn sure doesn't need defended by me. I am,
however, defending the intent and basis of his observation.
top of page
The Failure to Acknowledge and Provide a
Solution.
The solution provided by the Paciello Group to run on sentences
of text elements by JAWS or any adaptive technology user agent
within their blog post, of How JAWS reads text, was:
[insert vacuum here].
That is the Paciello Group's solution: emptiness, vacuum,
nothing. However, they have gone to lengths to build and justify a test
case that, in their opinion, shows that JAWS handles paragraph elements
and does so while they overlook that JAWS is, at times, buggy and will,
in fact, render paragraph elements as run on sentences.
That issue, if it stands by itself, is minor. Several things escalate
it, though.
Their test case is used to defend the paragraph element, how it is
rendered by JAWS and that any reference by any source that suggests that
such is not the case, the Paciello Group classifies it as a “little
knowledge”, “little understanding” and other such
silliness.
If that is not enough, their test case is flawed. What is at issue
is the value of punctuation, particularly ending punctuation that prefaces
any text content element's closing tag. In their specific case, their
p closing tag is preceded by a punctuation mark. Even in that
situation, they fail to acknowledge run on content through the header
elements into the paragraph elements, as a result of the lack of punctuation
within the test page's text content header elements, when JAWS or
Window–Eyes renders the content.
Source: The
Paciello Group's Test Case [EXT].
The title of the blog post clearly states “reads text”
but they focus exclusively upon the paragraph element and exclude any
analysis of other text elements or attributes. They want to get petty and
embolden reference to longdesc and alt as it
appears in Hickson's reference to the use of punctuation while they discount
the value of Hickson's statement. Then, they have the arrogance to use it
as a reference and as a basis for “incorrect conclusion” and
“poor implementation”. Anything can be taken out of content
and misused. That fact does not negate the value of the original source.
Source: A Sample of
the Paciello Group's Response [EXT].
The Paciello Group takes it out of context and then runs to defend
a specific user agent. Design of accessible content is not about
adaptation to any given, or even a handful, of adaptive technologies.
The Paciello Group's failure to acknowledge the value and necessity
of use of punctuation within all text elements and within text content
attributes points out their lack of understanding, limited knowledge and
their direct participation in promotion of “poor implementation”
of accessibility techniques and best practices. Proper use of punctuation
and grammar is one of the foundations of accessible content.
I generally don't get upset of removal of dissenting opinion or links
to dissenting opinion, on any blog. That, in my view, is the owner's
privilege. However, when such does occur, I do believe that readership
of the blog should be aware of its occurrence. It can indicate mindset
of the blog owner and, possibly based upon the specific instance, point
to the blog owner's objectivity or lack thereof.
Source: A removed blog post in text format 
.
The Paciello Group would better serve the
accessibility community, including themselves, by evaluating Hickson's
point on punctuation outside of the boundaries of any adaptive technology's
ability or performance of how it handles one solitary text content element.
top of page
Simple Test Cases.
A simple
test case is presented
that clearly demonstrates the value and the need for use of punctuation
within text content elements of a Web document. This test page tests
only three text content elements: the header element, the paragraph
element and the list element.
As far as the singular issue
of paragraph elements , JAWS conveys
run on content with a continual drop in pitch of its voice synthesis.
Pitch has a practical limit of how low it can go. If that limit is
reached within a text content element, such as a paragraph element, it
starts over. When that occurs and by its nature, it conveys a possible
semantic break or change within the content, e.g. the start of a new text
content element. JAWS and other adaptive technology user agents appear
to use punctuation marks to control the rate of pitch within the voice
synthesis.
One common problem within a lot of accessible
content is the functional use of the alt tag for images.
When it is used, more often than not, punctuation is omitted from the
text within the tag. The same applies to the use of the title
tag. In general, adaptive technologies may render these text content tags.
Without punctuation immediately prior to the closing tag of elements
or, in the case of attributes, punctuation immediately prior to the closing
quote, run on sentences occur. The above test case uses two consecutive images
that include punctuated alt tags. However, too point more
vividly the importance of punctuation within text content elements and
attributes, a separate test case is available
.
This is important for all text content
regardless of delivery, e.g. HTML, JavaScript, code behind, etc. A general
rule of thumb, if text content is or can be exposed to search engine
spiders then include appropriate punctuation.
top of page
A Long Term Solution.
With all of the variety of Web content and structures that exist,
regardless of tag soup or semantic markup, implementation of aural style
sheets needs to happen.
Browser manufacturers need to adopt aural style sheets. The modern
browser needs to embed certain aural style rules within the application
for the same reasons certain text styles have been embedded into them.
Every text content element and attribute should have automatically
attached to it, by the browser, a pause-after aural
style rule. Adaptive technology user agents then need to support and
render aural styles.
Web content developers who needed to flatten out any browser aural rules
could use a reset style sheet, or adjustment therein. It could be used for
the same reasons developers currently use a reset style sheet to flatten
out browser embedded text and design styles.
Until then or regardless, good grammar,
along with its implied proper punctuation, makes for a common best practice
for Web content development and communication.
top of page
Summary.
The bizarre thing is that the Paciello Group holds themselves out to
be accessibility experts. Hickson never has held himself out as such.
However, he is the only person who has pointed out the need for the
use of punctuation within text content elements. The Paciello guys, on
the other hand, try to discredit that. What these people may really take
objection is someone discounting and pointing out significant deficiencies
within a specific adaptive technology application, Freedom Scientific's
JAWS. Such is supported not only in their attitude and presentation but,
also, within the content of their test case.
If this were an isolated case or if within zeal, they overstated and
overlooked, any reasonable and responsible firm would acknowledge it and
move on. It happens to all of us, now and again. However, they haven't
and they won't. Much can be inferred from that.
These guys are of no use to me and of
little value to the objectivity that is a necessity to mainstream accessible
Web content. Just another bunch of misled geeks who are overly impressed
with each other. Such things happen within any business segment. Internet
Communication is no exception.
top of page
Semantic Markup and Use of the cite
Element.
Within this Web document, the cite
element has been incorrectly used in terms of semantic content markup.
It is temporary until the mood strikes to replace it with footnotes.
top of page
If you have any questions regarding the editorial, please
e-Mail that boinkin guy.
End of the Paciello Editorial Primary Content.
.
They Are What They
Are.
Sgt. Orville Sacker.
The Only Man in the World with Photographic
Hearing.
Aural Style Sheets.
Within the same vein as run on sentences, adoption of aural style
sheets by the major browsers would help.
It would help usability for Web visitors if a pause could be affected
on hyperlinks while focus is maintained upon the link. A pause would aid
in giving the user sufficient time to decide whether or not the user
would like to activate the link.
An aural style sheet rule could be used to affect such a pause.
The more expensive adaptive technology user agents provide users with
various methods of link organization within a Web document. However, if
accessibility is viewed in overall context of benefit to all Web visitors,
aural style sheet implementation may be required. This is particularly
true if the Web is to ever migrate to an optional text-to-speech
and voice recognition medium.
Improvement to User Configuration.
As Hickson pointed out in his blog entry [EXT],
user configuration of an adaptive technology can be a frustrating experience
even for those who are technically proficient. Improvements can be made.
About four or five years ago, I proposed a possible solution to one
of the adaptive technology user agent manufacturers. It was met with a
lukewarm reception. I find no fault with that but I still believe the
concept has merit.
The W3C should
develop an Accessibility Policy Standard similar to its Personal Privacy
Policy [P3P] standard. Within this policy, a Web site states, according
to standard, what accessibility features and standards the site has
implemented and met.
In conjunction with that, an existing independent accessibility
organization provides a service similar to the ICRA that provides
an in depth questionnaire for the developer/designers. From that
questionnaire and the responses to it, an RDF/XML file is generated and
loaded up to the Web site's server.
An adaptive technology user agent could then read this file and
automatically customize user settings for the user agent that targets
the accessibility features provided by that specific Web site or
document. Naturally, the user should have the option to opt-in
or opt-out on the fly for such customized settings.
Cost of Adaptive Technologies.
Adaptive technology software and hardware is terribly expensive. The
cost burden to a lot of designers/developers, not too mention those
with disabilities, can be prohibitive. Trial versions for the two most
widely used, Freedom Scientific's JAWS and GW Micro's Window-Eyes,
are available.
Each of these products has a forty minute and a thirty minute timeout,
respectively, for each session. Upon expiration of the timeout, a computer
reboot is necessary to reset the timeout period.
Once the application is launched and the timeout period begins,
closing the application will not halt the timeout period. In other words,
once launched, use the timeout period or lose it.
While these timeout periods are cumbersome and inconvenient to the
designer/developer who wishes to check for functional accessibility of
Web content, it can be accommodated. One technique that can be used to
help overcome this time restriction is to develop a basic template, or
series of templates, that are either replications of the site's design
or actual templates used within the site's design. Test these templates
against the adaptive technology user agent.
Design Foundation for Accessibility.
There are three primary areas that set the foundation for accessible
and inter-operable Web content: linear structure of the document,
semantics of the markup and good grammar. Keep in mind that punctuation
is a function of good grammar.
Within a visual medium, style is generally used to convey a pause or
a separation of text content and its segments. To translate that visual
cue into an audible or a tactile medium, punctuation is an integral
necessity.
Visual cues, as created with style elements, e.g. columns, footers, etc.,
are presented by a visual medium as points of orientation. Arguments can
be made that such visual orientation points should be replicated with
text content. Such content can then be hidden off-screen by style.
Those orientation points can then be communicated into an audio and
tactile delivered document.
A generalized rule of thumb, so to speak, is that: if all script and
all non fundamental styles are stripped away from the document, will the
document communicate to the user what the designer/developer/project
intends and requires to have communicated.
The objective should be that the document needs to do that regardless
of device that is used to access the document and regardless of any
user handicap.
The last statement could very well be the proverbial “Holy
Grail” to Internet communication. Good luck.
A Basic Resource.
Too often within the process of trying to gain an understanding of
accessible Web content, there is too much information that is too
confusing. One of the most fundamental resources that I have found, fortunately
found right after its initial publication in 2001, is Robert B. Yonaitis's,
the Founder and Chief Technology Officer of Hiawatha Software,
“Understanding Accessibility”.
Its best value is its simple explanation, including examples, of the
World Wide Web Consortium's [W3C] Web Accessibility Guidelines [WCAG]
1.0. The entire book, in Adobe PDF
format, is available directly from HiSoftware [EXT], free of charge.
A copy of Adobe Reader [EXT] is required for
viewing the above e-Book.
“Understanding Accessibility” may also be
viewed directly online at HiSoftware's Web site [EXT].
Appearance.
Take a View Based upon Outward Appearance?
Never know what may lie behind it.