RE: Question about proper use of screen readers in 508 testing

I don’t want to seem like a grouch, but …

I kind of have two answers. First, you are right that in general, people should test to the standard, not to a specific assistive technology tool, or browser.  You can go down an endless rabbit hole.

On the other hand, what is our goal? I think it is to have a web site that is useable to the widest variety of people. It isn’t to check a box on a standard.

Depending on your situation, you might have a large number of users, who use JAWS, so JAWS testing is entirely appropriate. For example, in the state I work in, JAWS is the de facto standard for blind employees, of which there are a good number, so JAWS testing is appropriate.

On the useable thing, the button button thing is usually caused by having the word button in the label, and the screen reader identifies the control as a button, hence the double speak.  Why would you argue about this, just take the word button out of the label.

At one level, accessibility and usability are tied together and this is hard to reflect in a black and white standard.

Dave

David Andrews, CPACC
Minnesota State Services for the Blind



From: Mike Cleary <mike.cleary@grantsolutions.gov>
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2020 10:27 AM
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Subject: Question about proper use of screen readers in 508 testing

This message may be from an external email source.
Do not select links or open attachments unless verified. Report all suspicious emails to Minnesota IT Services Security Operations Center.

________________________________
Hello,
I'm new to the discussion list and have a question about how much reliance should be accorded to screen readers like JAWS when reporting accessibility issues.

We have an internal testing team that uses JAWS for 508 testing. They are reporting accessibility issues in cases where JAWS reads all the content on screen, but does not recognize certain expand/collapse widgets as clickable links.

In a different case, they have filed a "critical" bug in cases where a button is read as "button button.." Using the button is no problem; their argument is that the duplicate listing is potentially confusing. I say that's a usability problem, not an accessibility issue and thus not critical.

My concern is that the testers are testing to the tool, not to accessibility guidelines. Am I mistaken? Is there any guidance on how much to rely upon a tool? Is there anything in WCAG 2.0 that speaks to this issue?

Mike

Scrum Master
GrantSolutions.gov