Re: Multiple interfaces - a concrete example

At 01:56 PM 10/31/00 -0800, Cynthia Shelly wrote:
>Now, I submit that replacing the telephone interface with a screen reader 
>reading the Web site in a synthesized voice would make for a worse 
>interface to the data than the existing voice system, *even if* the Web 
>site were AAA compliant.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that and await an objective usability 
test of that premise. Personally, I find any serialized voice system to be 
a *very* second-class arrangement and will see about changing 
bank/credit-card/support systems that use such inhuman, demeaning methods. 
I can't believe that a properly presented screen reader version that is 
under the control of the user, and with which she is familiar will not win 
this contest hands-down.

That the semantics aren't presented in a gestalt view is a clear violation 
of the guidelines - probably in both versions you describe. The advantage 
for the bank is that they can point to the automated voice system and 
pretend that it gives an "equal alternative" and blindless people can't 
argue and most blind folks won't - but that doesn't make it right. In fact, 
if the phone system is so good they shouldn't even have to put up the Web 
version since everyone'd prefer it. Even though the evidence is largely 
anecdotal, it's fairly clear that nobody likes a "press one if you have a 
touch-tone phone" system. Accessibility aside, just the fact that when I 
call the AARP pharmacy and some of the operators will accept any of the 
data that will bring up the entire screen of interest while others insist 
on putting me through the hoops of "last name, first name" makes it clear 
that usability is still little understood in our infoworld. Sometimes my 
monthly pill ordering takes a few seconds, others several minutes and doing 
it on their Web site - forget it. The point of all this is that the data is 
there but access is effectively denied and that's what the guidelines are 
about - not the presentation choices.

It's so bad that Gregory usually works with the "view source" version of 
Web pages! Actually finds it quicker. The guidelines should be designed to 
preclude that necessity.

--
Love.
                 ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE

Received on Tuesday, 31 October 2000 18:23:10 UTC