Date
1 - 4 of 4
accessibility overlays on web sites
Don H
I assume that web sites are supposed to make their web sites accessible to those using screen readers. Nothing says they have to do a good job of doing so. I would vote for NVDA somehow hiding itself so these poorly implemented web sites couldn't see that a screen reader is being used. I know the same issue applies to Jaws and Narrator but I know that NVDA always does a better job of making the screen reader user friendly. My most recent issue with a accessible overlay is with a bank web site where instading of being able to read your balances and activity the numbers that show clearly on the screen as a numeric value are seen by NVDA as a spelled out version of the amount even if you attempt to cut and paste it into a document on your computer.
Brian's Mail list account
Yes a bit like gluing together some broken pottery with some of the bits missing, somebody described these solutions as!
I'm sure they have good intentions, and the makers of the overlays also see a cash cow, but there is as always, one true way to accessibility on a given web site. There is after all no real problem with making a nice looking site still comply with most of the guidelines, though slippage can occur over time as staff change of course.
I believe you should be able to hide that a screenreader is in use from a site if you want to, and I'd also say that sites in their first log on settings should ask you if you have a screenreader, if you want an overlay.
Its the lack of understanding that worries me. I even get people still asking after telling them that I cannot see large print, if they should make the font bigger in emails.
However getting back on topic, like this site, many use clickables for no apparent reason over links. I tend to just use them as links most of the time. I do find, however that Google Meets has problems with some headings also being controls and some browsers show the toggle while others do not for, for example the microphone or video on and off and the text often does not say its a control, let alone a toggle.
Brian
--
bglists@...
Sent via blueyonder.(Virgin media)
Please address personal E-mail to:-
briang1@..., putting 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name field.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I'm sure they have good intentions, and the makers of the overlays also see a cash cow, but there is as always, one true way to accessibility on a given web site. There is after all no real problem with making a nice looking site still comply with most of the guidelines, though slippage can occur over time as staff change of course.
I believe you should be able to hide that a screenreader is in use from a site if you want to, and I'd also say that sites in their first log on settings should ask you if you have a screenreader, if you want an overlay.
Its the lack of understanding that worries me. I even get people still asking after telling them that I cannot see large print, if they should make the font bigger in emails.
However getting back on topic, like this site, many use clickables for no apparent reason over links. I tend to just use them as links most of the time. I do find, however that Google Meets has problems with some headings also being controls and some browsers show the toggle while others do not for, for example the microphone or video on and off and the text often does not say its a control, let alone a toggle.
Brian
--
bglists@...
Sent via blueyonder.(Virgin media)
Please address personal E-mail to:-
briang1@..., putting 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name field.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don H" <lmddh50@...>
To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io>
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2022 9:24 PM
Subject: [nvda] accessibility overlays on web sites
I assume that web sites are supposed to make their web sites accessible
to those using screen readers. Nothing says they have to do a good job
of doing so. I would vote for NVDA somehow hiding itself so these
poorly implemented web sites couldn't see that a screen reader is being
used. I know the same issue applies to Jaws and Narrator but I know
that NVDA always does a better job of making the screen reader user
friendly. My most recent issue with a accessible overlay is with a bank
web site where instading of being able to read your balances and
activity the numbers that show clearly on the screen as a numeric value
are seen by NVDA as a spelled out version of the amount even if you
attempt to cut and paste it into a document on your computer.
From: "Don H" <lmddh50@...>
To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io>
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2022 9:24 PM
Subject: [nvda] accessibility overlays on web sites
I assume that web sites are supposed to make their web sites accessible
to those using screen readers. Nothing says they have to do a good job
of doing so. I would vote for NVDA somehow hiding itself so these
poorly implemented web sites couldn't see that a screen reader is being
used. I know the same issue applies to Jaws and Narrator but I know
that NVDA always does a better job of making the screen reader user
friendly. My most recent issue with a accessible overlay is with a bank
web site where instading of being able to read your balances and
activity the numbers that show clearly on the screen as a numeric value
are seen by NVDA as a spelled out version of the amount even if you
attempt to cut and paste it into a document on your computer.
Yeah overlays do help but eventually you should make it yourself.
What does warm my heart is that in the last few jobs I did, some sites were almost there.
The last one, I spent less time talking about accessibility and a lot more on language, and structure, where words should be, how to make the site look and behave like other similar sites, where some stuff should be for easier viewing.
99.9% of everything existed I just had to tweak it.
In the last 6 years I have not found a truely inaccessible site.
Most of it these days seem to be where lines of text is placed.
And of course if your whatever is accessible from the ground up well.
I often work on a site with a friend and had a lot of extra stuff loaded for security.
When I had a lot of extras loaded the site needed it.
However emails from the site a few weeks earlier had information I had put in with some of the programs a security risk but the site had improved to the extent those were not needed.
As a result I was able to remove 4 plugins and save some time.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
What does warm my heart is that in the last few jobs I did, some sites were almost there.
The last one, I spent less time talking about accessibility and a lot more on language, and structure, where words should be, how to make the site look and behave like other similar sites, where some stuff should be for easier viewing.
99.9% of everything existed I just had to tweak it.
In the last 6 years I have not found a truely inaccessible site.
Most of it these days seem to be where lines of text is placed.
And of course if your whatever is accessible from the ground up well.
I often work on a site with a friend and had a lot of extra stuff loaded for security.
When I had a lot of extras loaded the site needed it.
However emails from the site a few weeks earlier had information I had put in with some of the programs a security risk but the site had improved to the extent those were not needed.
As a result I was able to remove 4 plugins and save some time.
On 31/10/2022 9:48 pm, Brian's Mail list account via groups.io wrote:
Yes a bit like gluing together some broken pottery with some of the bits missing, somebody described these solutions as!
I'm sure they have good intentions, and the makers of the overlays also see a cash cow, but there is as always, one true way to accessibility on a given web site. There is after all no real problem with making a nice looking site still comply with most of the guidelines, though slippage can occur over time as staff change of course.
I believe you should be able to hide that a screenreader is in use from a site if you want to, and I'd also say that sites in their first log on settings should ask you if you have a screenreader, if you want an overlay.
Its the lack of understanding that worries me. I even get people still asking after telling them that I cannot see large print, if they should make the font bigger in emails.
However getting back on topic, like this site, many use clickables for no apparent reason over links. I tend to just use them as links most of the time. I do find, however that Google Meets has problems with some headings also being controls and some browsers show the toggle while others do not for, for example the microphone or video on and off and the text often does not say its a control, let alone a toggle.
Brian
Gene
Clickable means you can press enter on something and it will do whatever it is supposed to do.
Gene
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Gene
On 10/31/2022 3:48 AM, Brian's Mail list account via groups.io wrote:
Yes a bit like gluing together some broken pottery with some of the bits missing, somebody described these solutions as!
I'm sure they have good intentions, and the makers of the overlays also see a cash cow, but there is as always, one true way to accessibility on a given web site. There is after all no real problem with making a nice looking site still comply with most of the guidelines, though slippage can occur over time as staff change of course.
I believe you should be able to hide that a screenreader is in use from a site if you want to, and I'd also say that sites in their first log on settings should ask you if you have a screenreader, if you want an overlay.
Its the lack of understanding that worries me. I even get people still asking after telling them that I cannot see large print, if they should make the font bigger in emails.
However getting back on topic, like this site, many use clickables for no apparent reason over links. I tend to just use them as links most of the time. I do find, however that Google Meets has problems with some headings also being controls and some browsers show the toggle while others do not for, for example the microphone or video on and off and the text often does not say its a control, let alone a toggle.
Brian