- From: Steven Dale <sdale@stevendale.com>
- Date: Sun, 30 May 2004 01:56:56 -0400 (EDT)
- To: <dey.alexander@its.monash.edu.au>
- Cc: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Well, I brought topics like this up to the list and got flamed or turned around in sooo many circles I just gave up. Unfortunately some on here call themselves experts when they have not used the Assistive Technology that is used for browsing these accessible websites. Many on here consider blind users the only ones that need these guidelines written for. Oh, I am coming down too hard here? I think not, Mr. Clark points out the lack of pronunciation for screen readers. I am not attacking Mr. Clark, he has a very valid point! BUT, what about spelling in forms? What about hidden skip navigation? In just these two examples I have to ask about other disabilities. If you hide the skip navigation, users of switches, head mice, eye gaze systems cannot take advantage of it. Pronunciation and spelling in general is a tough battle for those with cognitive or learning disabilities. I would hope Mr. Clark keeps posting these findings as maybe it will help raise awareness to this list that focuses so much on screen readers and lets other disabilities go unchallenged. I dont want to stop the work on screen readers, that would go against what I am trying to say here. I just wish we could work harder on accessibility for ALL. my 2.5 cents -Steve Dey Alexander said: > > Charles McCathieNevile wrote: > >> I'm not sure why you find any of these results surprising. > > It is wonderful to see some real user-centred research going on in this > area. I'm sure many of us have are concerned about the lack of solid > user research to help apply WCAG guidelines in the most usable way. > > And I share Charles' surprise about the reaction to pronunciation issues > mentioned in the summary of some of Ginny Redish's studies. I'd have > though most people reading this list would have some experience of > screen readers, even if only the evaluation version of HPR or through > observing other folks using them. > > "Skip to content (happy)" has always been an annoyance, along with > "hommaparj" (so I always avoid writing it as one word). But I like the > way JAWS pronounces my stupid university system username "dalexand" - > humans at work refer to it as "dee alexand (emphasis on the second > syllable)", whereas it sounds like the name of one of santa's reindeers > when JAWS says it. Or maybe I have a gin too many already today :) > > Cheers, > Dey (pronounced Dee, not Day - humans AND JAWS usually get this one > wrong)
Received on Sunday, 30 May 2004 01:57:18 UTC