- From: Andrew Arch <amja@optushome.com.au>
- Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 17:03:12 +1100
- To: "WAI Interest Group" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
I'd just like to endorse Kynn and David. Having recently started working with visually impaired people and doing some user testing with them, I am surprised at some of the "assumptions" I had previously made, and the little "gotchas" that show up with user testing. I now do a quick check with JAWS first and get the obvious things fixed, then retest with a 'Jaws' user and a 'ZoomText' user to pick up usability issues - and we always find some. Andrew From: "Kynn Bartlett" <kynn@reef.com> Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2001 3:05 AM > At 06:50 AM 2/16/2001, David Poehlman wrote: > >I'd add that it is even more vital if possible to have experience with > >assistive technology. Often times, lack of experience in using it can > >lead to false impressions. > > This is an excellent point. I would say that it is more important to > _get experienced users to test your work_ rather than _having hands- > on experience yourself_. > > In other words, if you want to know if your site works with assistive > technology, round up a regular screen reader user and hire or bribe > or plead with her to test your site. Don't assume that _your_ > experience, if you are a visually oriented user playing with a > screen reader, is good enough to test. > > I never trust my own experiences with a screen reader, ever. I > barely know how to operate the thing. The only thing I ever > personally use a screen reader for is demos -- showing people how > bad certain web sites sound. I have found it is very hard for > sighted people to become good at screenreader use. > > --Kynn
Received on Saturday, 17 February 2001 01:08:20 UTC