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

While I can't absolutely speak for the state of Minnesota, I will add that JAWS is a de facto standard, it is not an absolute standard. I know we have employees who use NVDA and/or Narrator, or a Mac. Whatever works.   If a given agency used JAWS you could also request something under an accommodation and it would be granted I would  think.

Finally I was making a case for JAWS testing in some situations, but this isn't absolute. Other testing would also be appropriate.

Dave



-----Original Message-----
From: Karen Lewellen <klewellen@shellworld.net> 
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2020 4:52 PM
To: Mike Cleary <mike.cleary@grantsolutions.gov>
Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Subject: Re: 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.

________________________________

Hi Mike, and to a degree David.
Mike, I personally am one of those who believe  you are testing to a standard, not a tool.
Recently I discovered  a resource that echos my opinion, called the a11y project.
https://gcc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.a11yproject.com%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Cdavid.b.andrews%40state.mn.us%7C72e63d1fd15142d5606908d82f536acd%7Ceb14b04624c445198f26b89c2159828c%7C0%7C1%7C637311382605187268&amp;sdata=sCtuH0aw3y%2FuJHORZLrOODoej6%2B7mWkKJ2JxjZxpM8s%3D&amp;reserved=0
They discuss a myth that access  only means blind people, outlining the various other populations who are equally entitled to websites working with their  adaptive tools.
Speaking personally I crowed a  finding this in writing because I often run into examples of David's standards, if I expect a site to work I have
to be a Jaws user, even if in my personal case that would do me   rather
allot of physical harm.
I experience an auditory processing condition, caused by a slight stroke during an eye surgery, in addition to sight loss.  Medically for me most software generated  speech, like that in Jaws, stimulates my brain's dizzy centres.  I have no problem with hardware speech, which I  can say use in Linux, and remain hopeful that I may find an apple solution once I can  get my dream macbook pro.
However, according to David if I sought employment with the state of Minnesota, I am going to be required to use jaws?  Not the best adaptive tool combination for me to do the job,  but Jaws?
Speaking personally, testing to a single tool is the best way to Slam a door on accessibility, because you are, no matter how well intended, perpetuating the stereotype that everyone  sharing a label is the same.
Not to mention the idea that only blind people using a specific tool as you define it, are deserving of site access.
and if the site in question serves the general public?  You are going to say our site is fine, because it works for jaws users?
David,  given how individualized the human experience is, who writes the definition of widest possible  number of people?
As for the button button issue,  speaking personally, I come across that allot, and never give it a thought.  I am far more concerned if the button works from the keyboard, and  many times, it is a scripted one.
Given how many populations  using tools other than screen readers might be impacted, the answer is and always should be standard, tested in many ways
using   many testing methods supporting browser agnostic rules...speaking
personally of course.
Karen




On Thu, 23 Jul 2020, Mike Cleary wrote:

> 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
>

Received on Monday, 27 July 2020 13:24:44 UTC