RE: [webwatch] Change Column Layout on WAI Page

I don't think the question, "should this kind of thing be encouraged"
requires a long answer. No it should not be encouraged. Absolutely not.
Already the WAI site has placed the navigation links on the right which
means NO skip navigation is needed. It is hard enough to convince folks to
do things that really make a difference; time should not be wasted doing
things that make NO difference. Having this on the WAI site is confusing for
visitors looking for best practices and expecting to find it on the WAI

<commercial> In the new book, Constructing Accessible Web Sites by myself,
Cynthia  Waddell, Shawn Henry, Sarah Swierenga, Mark Urban, Mike Burks and
Paul Bohman,, there
is a table of an unscientific survey of 10 of the top 100 web sites. They
have an average of 25 images without alt text. </commercial>

Labels are almost never used on forms. Table markup is very rare. Raise the
issues that make a difference. Please.

Accessibility Consulting
Constructing Accessible Web Sites, is now available at Amazon:!
I recommend it. It's a good book! Buy hundreds.

-----Original Message-----
From: Al Gilman []
Sent: Sunday, April 14, 2002 9:38 AM
Subject: RE: [webwatch] Change Column Layout on WAI Page

At 10:25 PM 2002-04-13 , Kelly Ford wrote:
>So is this sort of idea helpful for folks who use browsing technologies
>that don't linearize pages by default?  Should it be encouraged more?

When this web-server function was added, a lot of the motivation was based
on what we had heard about older screen readers that did not successfully
linearize tabular presentations of information.

Ion Systems definitely believes that this sort of transformation is helpful
for people with mild to moderate visual impairments whose needs can
otherwise be addressed by screen magnification.  They do the transformation
in a plugin, not on the server.  But that doesn't change whether it is
helpful to the user or not.

Several of the commentors on that thread seem to confirm that the transform
is helpful, but question whether there aren't better ways to get it, such as
using the Opera browser.

The question "should [this sort of idea] be encouraged more?" is not a
short-answer question.

If you mean consumers nagging webmasters to support something, the answer is
probably no.  There is nothing as clear and simple as the skip-navigation
link that consumers can explain to webmasters, the webmasters implement it,
and the result is what you want.

Part of my problem is in the presumed nature of where the change is coming
from.  The processing that takes computer data and puts it in shape to be a
user interface is moving from the client computer to the server computer.
This is not happening overnight, and it is not a wholesale replacement.  But
the trend is there, to the best of my ability to read the tea leaves.  The
driving force is commercial activities wishing to be able to offer services
to mobile people via their mobile equipment, whether a pocket organizer or a
pocket telephone, and the same information or services to be accessible from
a laptop or desktop computer in a different interface arrangement.  You
review the options for flights and hotels for your trip on the big screen
before you commit to a plan.  Here you look at more options and a tabular
presentation is a big help.  You review your options for repair when your
booked flight is canceled on whatever is on your person and able to alert
you to the prob!
  Here you have a tiny screen and a short list of options with more separate
steps to modify the narrow search constraints is how one operates.

This is a two edged sword, a mixed problem and opportunity.  It means that
the visually impaired user needs services that understand more than the
idioms of the desktop user interface.  This sounds like a problem.  But the
content as edited by the authors to be delivered via a voice dialog are
intrinsically more usable in audio than the screen presentation that one
deconstructs with a screen reader.

In terms of "should this be encouraged?" I haven't learned anything more
recently that changes the general picture we at Trace painted for
Supercomputing 2000.

 Middleware and the eSCaped Web (handout)

The answer for the screen reader user is more like "it should not be
discouraged."  Developers of server-side transformations should be
developing their solutions in a way that still supports client-side
transforms applied later where there is more knowledge of the user's precise
needs.  And user choice of which server-side option they access.  Will the
dialog as designed for delivery over a telephone be available as a
configuration option when you access a web site?  It might be good for users
if it were.

The "it should not be discouraged" line has been cautiously pursued by the
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group in their working


 Regarding "Client-side and Server-side Solutions"

  S1 - Serving content in different forms to meet different user needs
  and preferences is an acceptable way to comply with the guidelines, as
  long as the different forms:
    * are complete (i.e., they provide equivalents for all the content),
    * can be obtained from visiting the same URI
    * are up to date, and
    * can be easily selected according to user preferences.

  Note: We will not make any assumptions in this Requirements document
  about the method that is used, whether it is content negotiation or a
  link. The issue of where and how the user sets their preferences is an
  item that has not been discussed.


For users of industrial strength screen readers, the process may well feel
mostly like bumps in the road.  Consider the on-the-server font and color
adjustments recently added to the Access Board website.  They complicate the
nuisance factor of the head of page stuff for screen reader users, and add
no value to the blind.  But they put easy access to the page within easier
reach of people with less need and less assistive technology.  Some of those
people have enough need to genuinely need help but not enough impairment to
need an industrial strength screen reader which rivals the computer itself
in cost.  So we are into the sticky domain of just how do you decide when on
some fronts you are giving a little help to many that they need (but don't
desperately need) and it has some cost for those who have desperate needs,
but it doesn't cost enough to destroy the solution for those with the
desperate needs?  Tough questions.

The ultimate solution is going to involve having the server understand how
to serve web services that play as readlets in the screen reader for those
using a screen reader.

Screen reader developers interested in developing this concept with academic
or industrial partners, or via W3C groups, may follow up with me.  On or off
the list as you wish and the moderator advises.


>At 02:29 PM 4/13/02 -0500, you wrote:
>>Hi Kelly,
>>With your help I found the link to "Change Column Layout" on
>>Near the top there are four links "news - about - participation -
>>and then, an icon which shows two vertical bars right arrow one vertical
>>bar" with the alt text and title "Change column layout." What that link
>>is to take the column of navigation links which appear down the right side
>>and put them at the bottom. It removes the table that is used for
>>and displays the page exactly as you see it, linearized. The two views of
>> are indistinguishable with the screen reader.
>>Accessibility Consulting
>>Constructing Accessible Web Sites, is now available at Amazon:
>>I recommend it. It's a good book! Buy hundreds.
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Kelly Ford []
>>Sent: Saturday, April 13, 2002 7:50 AM
>>Subject: [webwatch] Change Column Layout on WAI Page
>>Hi All,
>>Can someone explain to me what the Change Column Layout link on
>><> does?  I tried to figure it out by exploring the
>>screen with JAWS and Window-Eyes outside their buffered (VPC or MSAA Mode)
>>view of the page.  This is more like moving the mouse around the screen to
>>see what's present.
>>I'm asking for an explanation because it wasn't obvious to me what was
>>supposed to be changing.  Also, is whatever this page does something more
>>web sites should be doing?
>>To Post a message, send it to:
>>To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
>>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>>To Post a message, send it to:
>>To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
>>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>To Post a message, send it to:
>To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Stock for $4
and no minimums.
FREE Money 2002.

To Post a message, send it to:
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to

Received on Sunday, 14 April 2002 12:53:18 UTC