Re: Accessibility: conversation starters:

Hi,

As I wrote in response to Tzviya on the "machine readability conversation
starter", a detailed accessibility API mapping for mathematics seems
unrealistic to me at this time. A good API would require well-thought out
semantics and we just don't have a good basis for that in the wild. I don't
think mathematics is ready (as a culture) and we'd likely just end up
repeating the mistakes of the past.

I think human accessibility issues are separate because they cannot live
off partial results. To repeat my example, exposing units somewhere in an
expression can help search even if the expression is otherwise
unintelligible. But that won't help humans.

I suspect for humans we'll have to check our expectations. Today the most
reliable method is still to use binary images with alt text: static images
are the most reliable in terms of cross browser/platform/network conditions
for visual rendering and alt-text is the only way to guarantee at least
some alternative rendering (e.g. aural and braille) -- no matter how poor
the results may be.

Don't get me wrong, in many specific situation, there will be better ways.
If you have simple content, then you can get decent visual results with
HTML tags with nested aria-labels. If you know you can rely on webfonts
(e.g., many ebook situations) then you can use CSS with webfonts for
rendering (and again nested labels). If you don't need IE8 (sigh) then you
can use SVG etc.

But in generality, binary images with alt-text are still the most robust
way -- and that's an extremely sorry state. I'm pretty sure we can do
better but we need to identify what users need and what tools can
realistically achieve today.

My first guess would be: some form of speech text, potentially enabling
some level of exploration through nesting (and perhaps full exploration via
JS). That's not as bad as it sounds. SVGs with aria-labels are already a
close second in terms of usability (pending the ultimate demise of IE8),
and like HTML they open up the opportunity of deep-labels and thus already
get a certain level of exploration.

But there are other aspects. For example in the US, MathSpeak has a long
history and many users of aural rendering are trained to its way of
describing the visual structure of an equation. I've heard enough anecdotal
evidence to take this very seriously -- after all, that's how visual users
do it. Still, a few months ago I learned that in Germany, on the other
hand, blind students might learn TeX syntax early in school (most likely
because there is no tradition like MathSpeak which, after all, precedes the
web by decades).

I also expect much overlap with SVG accessibility, where the challenges of
summary information at a top level and exploration of details are very
similar to mathematics.

Anyway, I'm guessing there'll be plenty to talk about in a first meeting.
So more +1 so that we can set that up.

Best regards,
Peter.


On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Jean Kaplansky <jeankap@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1 from me for a11y too.
>
> Jean Kaplansky
> jeankap@earthlink.net
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Charles LaPierre <charlesl@benetech.org>
> Date: Wed, May 4, 2016 at 8:12 AM
> Subject: Accessibility: conversation starters:
> To: "public-mathonw." <
> ​​
> public-mathonwebpages@w3.org>
>
>
>
> Accessibility for me +1
>
> Charles LaPierre
> Technical Lead, DIAGRAM and Born Accessible
> charlesl@benetech.org
>
>
>
> On May 4, 2016, at 4:59 AM, Kaveh Bazargan <
> kaveh@rivervalleytechnologies.com> wrote:
>
> Layout for me...
>
> On 4 May 2016 at 11:16, Peter Krautzberger <peter.krautzberger@mathjax.org
> > wrote:
>
>> Hi math-on-webpages,
>>
>> Here's a short list of topics to start a conversation. These four came up
>> on the call, feel free to add.
>>
>> If you're interested, just
>>
>> * spin off a new thread (change subject in your reply)
>> * comment or +1 so that we can
>> * team up for some dedicated conversations
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Peter.
>>
>> **layout**
>>
>> Whether CSS, SVG, or canvas, if you're interested in talking about math
>> layout on the web, let's collect best practices, use cases, and analyze
>> gaps in the OWP.
>>
>> **accessibility*
>>
>> If you're working on making math accessible -- ARIA, speech, braille,
>> internationalization etc.
>>
>> **editing**
>>
>> Web-based editing touches virtually everything -- layout, interaction,
>> accessibility -- but gathering information unique to the challenges of
>> editing would be worthwhile.
>>
>> **machine readability**
>>
>> Exposing information to machines, I hear it's a thing -- JSON, microdata,
>> RDFa etc.
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Kaveh Bazargan
> Director
> River Valley Technologies
> @kaveh1000
> +44 7771 824 111
> www.rivervalleytechnologies.com
>
>
>
>