Archive for October, 2008
WCAG 2.0 & ATAG 1.0 – Do These Standards Go Far Enough?
Originally posted June 13, 2008
As noted in my last post, the WCAG 2.0 standard released April 30 is greatly needed. The introduction of the time dimension to Web 2.0 pages is not clearly addressed in these standards. Streaming video along with parallel synchronous static content and dynamic animations provides a challenge to software developers and visually impaired users alike.
I have created a summary of the WCAG 2.0 standard, (WCAG 2). The summary includes a review of the Authoring Tool Accessibility Guideline (ATAG) 1.0 standard as well. ILS is looking at these standards to make DigitalChalk more accessible. Hopefully, this overview helps your understanding of the new release of these standards.
WCAG 2.0 Standards: A Challenge for Software – A Needed Standard for the Visually Impaired
Originally posted May 28, 2008
AJAX, dynamic HTML, other client browser side technologies and Web 2.0 data integration have greatly enhanced the end users’ experience on the Web. With these technologies, persons with visual impairment have been given a challenge in being able to access the Web. Alternative information can be used to describe Flash animations and graphics, but screen readers alone cannot overcome synchronous presentation of parallel multimedia information.
Persons with visual impairments encounter a unique challenge when attempting to interact with current generation multimedia content developed online. Multimedia content including video, audio and animations are often presented to the user in a synchronous manner with other visual and text elements. Video displayed on a page at the same time with text transcripts, still images and presentation slides work to generate a rich, pleasing experience for sighted users. The introduction of a time element creates a burden for the visually impaired person who must consume the material in a serial (audio and tactile) fashion.
If the visually impaired person is to have a rich and equivalent experience, the system needs to present the material in a non-linear and asynchronous manner. This presents a technical challenge to software developers presenting multimedia in parallel streams of information. The visually impaired user must be queued to consume alternative information. The software must provide a way for the user to pause streams of information, consume alternative information and resume the stream. DigitalChalk is looking at ways to meet these challenges with its course authoring and delivery system.
Paper Money Discriminates Against the Blind?
Originally posted May 15, 2008
MY OPINION – The U. S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled 2 – 1 that paper money discriminates against the blind. The court agrees with a lower court 2006 ruling that the federal government has to provide a workable solution. The court does not dictate the remedy. Some of the solutions, such as different sized money, may be worse for the blind. Smaller bills may be easily lost. Raising print or a seal on the bill may be the best solution. Bills may not last as long in circulation though. The cost may be higher than the value of the fix. Not all advocates for the blind agree that the U. S. currency discriminates against the blind. This case raises other questions
- Do merchants have to supply braille receipts?
- Should manufacturers provide braille instructions with their products?
- Do blind people need multiple retail clerks to verify purchase integrity?
- How about restaurants, how do blind people know if they are given the appropriate portions?
- Do towns and cities discriminate against blind people because they do not implement GPS audio maps?
- Do movie theaters discriminate because they do not provide alternative text/braille devices describing the action in the movie?
- Should all sporting events provide audio narratives for the visually impaired?
Not all situations in life discriminate against the blind. Blind people are not all victims. Life presents challenges to all people. Blind people have different challenges. It is society’s responsibility to do its best to accommodate all people allowing them to participate. This should not be legislated by the courts. I believe
1. The blind community needs to help establish accessibility guidelines and standards.
2. Responsible people will adapt the standards because it is the right thing to do.
Many accessibility standards are good for the population at large. Activism needs to come from individuals, not government mandates. Grant and contract providers can specify guidelines. Courts should not impose standards in all cases.
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 Is Available
Originally posted May 5, 2008
In general, web based 508 Accessibility requirements for software includes:
- Software Applications and Operating Systems - includes usability for people that are visually impaired, such as alternative keyboard navigation.
- Web-based Intranet and Internet Information and Applications – assures accessibility to web page graphics by the visually impaired using assistive technology such as screen readers and refreshable Braille displays.
- Videos or Multimedia Products - includes requirements for captioning of multimedia products such as training or informational multimedia productions. Captioning or video descriptors must be able to be turned on or off.
The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (WCAG 2.0) was published as a W3C Candidate Recommendation on 30 April 2008. The Candidate Recommendation stage means that there is broad consensus on the technical content, and W3C invites you to implement WCAG 2.0. Additional information in:
- WCAG 2.0 Candidate Recommendation Ready to Test Drive
- How WAI Develops Accessibility Guidelines through the W3C Process
- Overview of WCAG 2.0 Documents
Infinity Learning Solutions is adding closed captioning to DigitalChalk to help the hearing impaired. Is this enough? Does closed captioning really help the totally deaf who see English as a second language? I am exploring web based 508 requirements to determine the difference between guidelines and what is actually useful. There are helpful web sites for Accessibility Best Web Practices (Illinois Center for Information Technology Accessibility). I am especially interested in applying these practices to online learning. Any comments on this would be helpful.
Accessibility For the Hearing Impaired
Originally Posted April 30, 2008
Being visually impaired, it is difficult for me to clearly understand learning needs by the hearing impaired community. At first, one would think that all hearing impaired are visual learners. One would also think that closed captioning is the only requirement for making a multimedia web site accessible to the hearing impaired.
Today, I spent some time discussing web based learning needs of the hearing impaired with a teacher from the North Carolina School for the Deaf. I learned some very interesting myths about hearing impaired learning needs.
- Closed captioning on a multimedia web site is all that is needed by the hearing impaired. – This is not true. For individuals who have partial hearing loss, closed captioning is very helpful. For individuals who have been totally deaf since birth, English is a second language. For many deaf people, reading English text requires experience in translating to their native language. Sign language is their native language. For web pages with audio and/or video, sign language would be very helpful and would be preferred by some deaf persons.
- All hearing impaired people are visual learners. – This is not true. This is a gross stereotype. Some hearing impaired persons are tactile learners. Some would have naturally been auditory learners. One size does not fit all hearing impaired learners.
- Any certified sign language interpretor can be used to sign a course lesson. – This is not necessarily optimal. A certified sign language interpretor can sign a lesson, but skills of an instructor or teacher would be an added value. Teachers are subject matter experts in what they teach. They are also aware of the language skills of their students. Signing for calculus, or a high level math course, may require different signing skills than that done by a generalist. Signing to grade school students would be different than for high school students. The quality of the signing can make a difference in the learning experience of a hearing impaired student.
Infinity Learning Solutions (ILS) is working with the City University of New York, Hunter College and IBM Research to add automated closed captioning in the DigitalChalk Fall Release. Though this is helpful, we at ILS are committed to adding a capability for audio/video sign language translation as well. Signing would have to be added manually to the audio/video. I hope this will help.