All About Access

I suppose after looking their gift horse in the mouth, suggesting that evil is as evil does regardless of what your mission statement may claim, and, oh yeah, that whole call to action business, I should give Google some credit. Or at least the benefit of the doubt. Google will be presenting at CSUN this year:

• Accessibility at Google: An Overview
• Audio CAPTCHA at Google

I hope to hear not only a strong committment to accessibility from the Mountain View delegation, but also a strong willingness to learn. Don’t talk to us; talk with us.

With any luck, their second session will be well-attended by members of the Deaf-Blind community (for whom Audio CAPTCHA is as accessible as the visual version).

Ok, so perhaps that’s not as quite as catchy as “Beware the Ides of March.” I nonetheless have a sinking feeling that some of us won’t be fairing much better than ol’ Julius in the weeks to come.

What’s going to happen on the first, you ask? IE 7 is going to come out via Automatic Updates.

So why is that a problem? It’s not, as long as you are running the latest version of your screen access software. And that is the kicker: Given the high cost of assistive technology — screen readers in particular — there are tons of users who aren’t. They cannot afford to. How many of these users are going to go ahead and install IE7 when prompted to do so, only to discover that web browsing no longer seems to work correctly? While I hope I am mistaken, I suspect quite a few. (First ribbons, and now this. I do wish Microsoft would stop doing us favors…. )

Rehabilitation Engineer Geoff Howard posted the following on the NHBlind-Talk list. I’ve decided to borrow it since the information is valuable. Besides, I have to conserve my energy for all of the inevitable questions and support requests that will result from Microsoft’s decision.

• If your computer is set to automatically download and install critical updates, you could turn on your computer some morning and find that you’ve been updated. The current versions of most assistive technology products are not fully compatible with Internet Explorer 7.
• My first recommendation is to set the automatic updates feature to “Notify me but don’t automatically download or install”. This can be found in the Control Panel, under Automatic Updates. You’ll be able to view a list of available updates as they are released, just make sure not to choose the Internet Explorer 7 update yet.
• Internet Explorer 7 turns on “Clear Type” by default, which may cause some video corruption for large print users. This can be turned off in the Internet Options, Advanced Tab.
• ZoomText users: Ai Squared working on ZoomText version 9.04. This will be a free update to users of the version 9 product. Version 9.04 will be compatible with Internet Explorer 7. The release is expected in November. You can check for the update in ZoomText by going to “Check for Program Updates” in the ZoomText programs help menu.
• JAWS Users: JAWS 7.0 and earlier do not support Internet Explorer 7. JAWS 7.10 is recommended for testing, but JAWS will not be fully optimized for Internet Explorer 7 until the release of JAWS 8.0.
• MAGic Users: Version 9.50 and later can be tested with Internet Explorer 7.
• Window-Eyes: GW Micro has some registry tweaks for some items that they have found in IE 7. Information can be found in the knowledge base section of their web site. They detail support for IE 7 in the information section for beta 6, which can be found at http://www.gwmicro.com/News_&_Events/Latest_News/?newsNo=45

By now, Accessible Search is old news — news that I initially had no intention of blogging about. But ever since the launch was brought to my attention, a couple of things have been bothering me. And I’ve come to the realization that they will continue to do so until I get them off my chest.

While I am delighted to see that Google is now taking accessibility seriously, I’m not so sure they’re going about it in the right way. Before investing the time and energy to create an alternative search engine which analyzes the content and structure of external pages, wouldn’t it have made sense to examine their own site for usability? If they had done that — and perhaps compared what they have to offer with the far more accessible Yahoo equivalents — they might have discovered things like:

• Formatting the list of search results as a true list makes it possible for the screen reader user to jump directly to the results rather than have to take the time to work his/her way down. It would also make it possible for the user to navigate quickly from item to item without having to Tab repeatedly through instances of “Cached” and “Similar pages”.
• The proper use of headings can give the user who is blind a good understanding of a page’s structure. And like lists — and for that matter other elements — headings can be quickly navigated among using screen reader commands.

But Google didn’t do that. Instead they left those access problems in place and created a specialized search engine just for blind users — an engine which, as Mark pointed out the other day, shares many of the same structural shortcomings as the rest of the site.

Structural issues aside, I think the folks at Google are missing a fundamental point: Relevancy has NOTHING to do with visual acuity. Relevancy is about the content, not the container. Of course, that is not to say that the container can be dismissed. Far from it. As Google states in their Accessible Search FAQ:

In the past, visually impaired Google users have often waded through a lot of inaccessible websites and pages to find the required information.

Agreed. BUT: By creating a separate search engine for users who are blind — something which in and of itself bothers me, and which seems to contradict their mission of making information universally accessible — Google is merely treating the symptoms; not curing the disease. And what bothers me the most about that is if anyone is in a position to find a cure, it’s Google.

I mean, let’s face it, for better or for worse Google has become the center of the online universe. Businesses and individuals are utterly obsessed with attaining the highest possible page rank — not in Yahoo or in MSN, but in Google. All Google would have to do is integrate their new “accessibility” algorithm into their current method of assigning rank. If your page isn’t accessible, its rank plummets — not just in some specialized search engine, but universally. No one would find you. No one would click on your AdSense ads. Sure people would complain at first — at least those who hadn’t designed their site with accessibility in mind would. But those folks would bite the proverbial bullet and fix their site because Google’s influence is that great.

Were that to occur, there would be no need for a separate but supposedly equal search engine for users who are blind. With that, plus a little structural cleanup, Google could proudly — and this time rightfully — claim that they had fulfilled their mission to “better organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible.”

Google: Sometimes it’s not merely the thought that counts. Sometimes it really is the gift….

Technorati Tags: Google, Accessible Search

Until recently, the all mighty Google had a poor reputation among visual and mobility impaired web users. Their use of visual verification systems like “captcha” to prevent automated bots from creating Google user accounts (see Oops, Google Did it Again and A Call to Action: Captchas Limit Equal Access to Information) created barriers to visually impaired users. The lack of structural markup made it difficult for visual and mobility impaired users (more specifically keyboard users) to quickly and efficiently navigate search results. And the heavy use of DHTML in many of their new “Web 2.0″ applications (like GMail, Google Calendar, Google Spreadsheets, and the long anticipated launch of their word processing app Writely) make it difficult if not impossible for keyboard only users to access these alternatives to bulky and expensive desktop applications (although this may not be considered their oversight, but rather a limitation of the access software in use today).

In the article ‘Google for the blind‘ recently published in the San Francisco Chronicle, Jessica Guynn writes about a new project in Google Labs called Google Accessible Search:

Google research scientist T.V. Raman, blinded by childhood glaucoma, doesn’t want the visually impaired to be sidelined on the Internet. That’s why this fervent proponent of making technology accessible to the entire disabled community moved from IBM to the Internet mainstream a year ago, and has been working tirelessly ever since toward Web sight for all. His latest effort? It’s called “Accessible Search,” a new Google search engine that aims to deliver results both relevant and easy for the visually impaired to access.

The article also mentions improvements in access to Google’s visual verification system:

Those squiggly words you see on a Web page that act as a security measure to keep out spammers. Known as “captchas.” They work great, if you can see them. Google finally added audio to their word verification system in April.

And it hints at greater things to come, like improved access to web apps like GMail and Google Talk.

I have to admit, the prospect of a more accessible Google, which is for many, the gateway to the World Wide Web, is very exciting. However, at first glance, it appears that Google Accessible Search has quite a ways to go. The lack of structural markup is a huge shortcoming. The only heading tag is an H1 wrapped around the first words on the page “Accessible Search.” How about adding an H2 to that meaningless word WEB that appears above the search results? Better yet, change that word to something meaningful, like RESULTS!)

Sarcasm aside, Google and T.V. Raman should be commended and encouraged in their efforts. A more accessible web benefits all. So be sure to read the article in full at The Technology Chronicles : Google for the blind. Don’t forget to look for quotes from Carroll Tech and All About Access’s very own Joanmarie Diggs!

Technorati Tags: Google, captcha, Accessible Search

A recent press release announces an effort by IBM to make Mozilla’s Firefox web browser more accessible. Firefox, long praised for its security, speed and extensibility has been condemned for its failure to work with access technology. IBM announces that it has added support for Microsoft Active Accessibility to version 1.5 of the Firefox browser. Theoretically, this should make Firefox as accessible as Internet Explorer. (more…)

Look up drug information, learn about diseases and conditions, and read articles about healthy living: It’s all at Yahoo Health, and it’s all accessible! (more…)

This very afternoon, my supervisor received the following question by email:

Is there a phone book on the computer which is accessible with JAWS? How do you use it? We are not allowed to use Directory Assistance at work so I need an alternative.

The timing of this question couldn’t be better! After all, it’s Yahoo Week at All About Access, and Yahoo has accessible phone directories. (more…)