From:

 Sandra Fouts

Subject:

 RE: Accessibility vs. Usability [was Re: some thoughts for window eyes features?]

Date:

 Thu, Jun 7, 2007 10:37:16 am

Of course! That's why they should try it. Or, at the least, turn off
the screen. Then, maybe, just maybe!, we might coul.d say, "Welcome
to my world!"


Sandra Fouts
Phone Counselor
Arkansas Attorney General's Office
323 Center Street, Ste 200
Little Rock, AR
501-371-2303
Fax 501-682-8118

-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Huber [mailto:khuber@sympatico.ca]
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 9:24 AM
To: gw-info@gwmicro.com; sfrf77@sbcglobal.net
Subject: Re: Accessibility vs. Usability [was Re: some thoughts for
window eyes features?]

Hi:
I think sighted people wearing a blindfold would find it much more
difficult to use a computer with speech than blind people. When I was
working for a nonprofit years ago, we did a workshop at a local college.
One of the things we did is ask a volunteer to come up from the audience
and put a blindfold on her. Then I was supposed to try to teach her how
to use the screen reader. It took forever to get her to type her name
because she could not find the right letters on the keyboard.
Kevin Huber

----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 5:50 AM
Subject: Fw: Accessibility vs. Usability [was Re: some thoughts for
window eyes features?]

Maybe that would be a good experiment. Sighted people that have
speech on their computer should try it with a blind fold for a few

days. Wonder how many times they would be tempted to take it off or
how frustrated they would get.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Thomas"

To: "David Tanner" ; ;

"Steve Jacobson" ; "Kevin Huber"

Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 9:55 PM
Subject: Re: Accessibility vs. Usability [was Re: some thoughts for

window eyes features?]

Good Point:
Speed and accuracy are important, critical actually, in a

professional

environment.

Too often I read of glowing reviews of software by hobbyists and the
weekend surfer. I'll cut it off here though and let you all get back

to

the nitty-gritty.

Rick USA

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Tanner"

To: ; "Steve Jacobson"
;

"Kevin Huber"

Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 10:33 PM
Subject: Re: Accessibility vs. Usability [was Re: some thoughts for

window eyes features?]

I agree, but I do not agree with those on this list that say that

that a

software is accessible if a person can wonder around the screen with
the

mouse until they find what they are looking for like a sighted
person.

In real life you may be able to use the software that way, but you
will

be so slow that your job performance will be so slow, and the chances
of

you missing something that a sighted person would have seen is so
high

that very long at that and you will loose your job. Anybody that

seriously believes that this is an acceptable way for a blind person
to

gain access to their software in a job environment needs to put on a

blind fold and have to work that way on unfamiliar software for a
couple

of weeks and see how long their employer would put up with that.

----- Original Message -----

From: "Kevin Huber"
To: ; "Steve Jacobson"

Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 5:45 PM
Subject: Re: Accessibility vs. Usability [was Re: some thoughts for

window eyes features?]

: Hi:

: In my opinion, the difference between usability and accessibility
is as

: follows: a program is usable even if it means taking a course,
reading

a

: manual or any other method of learning how to use it. If, however,
a

: program is not accessible, that means that no amount of learning
will

even

: make it possible to use.
: But that also brings me to an issue that I have not heard expressed

on

this

: list. That is that we, as blind people have to compete with our
sighted

: peers, especially in a working environment, thus dictating that our

screen

: readers need to do more than just make applications accessible. We

need to

: have shortcuts to compensate for not using a mouse like sighted
people

do.

: Kevin Huber
:

: ----- Original Message -----
: From: "Steve Jacobson"

: To:
: Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 5:01 PM

: Subject: Re: Accessibility vs. Usability [was Re: some thoughts for

window

: eyes features?]
:

:
: > Aaron,

: >
: > You have hit upon something when you said that some blind users

could

run

: > circles around some of your family members
: > with respect to computers. One of the challenges that those of

us

have

: > who are trying to deal with accessibility issues is
: > that we don't usually differentiate between accessibility and

usability.
: > If you are sighted, any problems with applications

: > are considered usability because computers are accessible to
sighted

: > people by default. However, not all applications

: > are usable by all sighted people. I can guarantee, for example,
that

many

: > sighted people wouldn't know where to start
: > with an audio editor or MIDI sequencer without a good deal of

education,
: > and some would never grasp it. As blind

: > people, we sometimes assume that if an application was accessible
we

: > should be able to use it. Since this is not true for

: > sighted people, it isn't going to be true for us either.
However,

with

: > the added complication of accessibility, how do we
: > know when it's usability and when it is accessability? In some

cases, I
: > would maintain that scripts of certain other

: > screen readers might well help sighted users by reducing
keystrokes

and

: > mouse clicks. That is why there are some
: > macro programs out their for windows. The benefits may not be as

: > essential for them as for us, but it does raise a valid
: > question. When is a screen reader providing usability rather

than

: > accessibility?

: >
: > The fact is that we're a small market and our usability is not

going

to be

: > a priority for application developers, , except
: > where a law may require it, so the screen reader is going to

sometimes
: > provide the usability to us that the application

: > doesn't. The line between accessibility and usability will
probably

never

: > be completely clear, but this is something that
: > we'll need to understand better as we try to get legal

requirements

in

: > place, and to define our expectations of screen
: > readers. Of course, the more usability we get into the

applications

: > themselves, the better off we will be.

: >
: > Best regards,

: >
: > Steve Jacobson

: >
: > On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 15:28:12 -0400, Aaron Smith wrote:

: >
: >>Matthew,

: >
: >>I'm not redirecting. I don't believe that you can equate using a

screen
: >>reader exactly like someone sighted. Screen reading is linear,

and

you

: >>have to approach applications differently from someone looking at
the

: >>screen. No one expects you to be able to use a computer like
someone

who

: >>can see everything at once. But you do have the utilities to
familiarize

: >>yourself with applications fairly easily. Once you know how to
navigate

: >>one, you'll have a better time navigating another.
: >

: >>But I think there's a fundamental problem with your line of
thinking,

: >>and that's that sight makes people better computer users. That

couldn't
: >>be more incorrect. I know a host of blind users who could run

circles

: >>around pretty much anyone in my family when it comes to using

computers.
: >>So, again, you're trying to draw a parallel apples and bananas.

: >
: >>Aaron

: >
: >>Matthew2007 wrote:

: >>> Aaron, lots of redirecting in your reply. You didn't answer my
question,

: >>> but you did confirm my beliefs about the window eyes
philosophy. Oh

: >>> yeah, and for those who believe that the great benefit to
window

eyes is

: >>> that the end user will begin interacting with the application
like

a

: >>> sighted person would do, you are also wasting a tremendous
amount

of

: >>> time "looking" for something to click on rather than just using
a

hot

: >>> key to quickly run the associated script. Though having the
time to

: >>> scour the screen is a luxury for most, in a work environment
where

: >>> timeliness is important this is not good at all.

: >>>
: >>> Matthew

: >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Aaron Smith"

: >>> To: "Matthew2007"
: >>> Cc:

: >>> Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 11:15 AM
: >>> Subject: Accessibility vs. Usability [was Re: some thoughts for

window

: >>> eyes features?]
: >>>

: >>>
: >>>> Matthew2007 wrote:

: >>>>> correct me if I'm wrong Aaron, but your definition of
accessibility

: >>>>> implies one is able to use the mouse cursor to click on icons
and

so

: >>>>> on like a sighted person would, correct?
: >>>>

: >>>> There's a difference between an application that's not
accessible

: >>>> (i.e. not usable) and one that does not have sets with user

windows,
: >>>> cursoring keys, or other bells and whistles (i.e. usable, but

not

: >>>> customized). Applications that are not customized should not
be on

a

: >>>> list of applications that are not accessible. Thems apples and

bananas

: >>>> if you ask me.
: >>>>

: >>>> Someone else, Rick I think, alluded that knowledge of an
application

: >>>> and of Window-Eyes is paramount to the "accessibility" of an
: >>>> application -- that's an argument we've had on this list

several

: >>>> times, and one we'll have until the sun burns out. One user
might

: >>>> claim the non-automatic reading of changing items on a status
bar

: >>>> makes an application inaccessible, whereas another user might
set

up a

: >>>> hyperactive window around the status bar, and never even
contemplate

: >>>> the application's accessibility. Yet another user might leave
the

: >>>> mouse pointer on the status line, and use the read current
mouse

line

: >>>> hot key whenever they wanted to know what the status line
says,

again

: >>>> never thinking about whether the application was accessible or

not.

: >>>> The more you know about Window-Eyes, and the more you know
about

the

: >>>> application you're using, the fewer "accessibility" issues
(note

the

: >>>> quotes) you'll have.
: >>>>

: >>>> Having said that, let it henceforth be known that I am on the
: >>>> scripting bandwagon; I think some very cool things can be done

with

: >>>> scripting. My laptop doesn't have physical volume keys, so I
scripted

: >>>> AutoHotkey to increase or decrease the volume when I pressed
either

: >>>> the WINDOWS-UP or WINDOWS-DOWN keys respectively. So I know
the

: >>>> benefit of scripting.

: >>>>
: >>>> At the same time, people who don't know how to use the

features of

set

: >>>> files (i.e. setting up user windows, modifying cursoring keys,
: >>>> tweaking verbosity and general settings, etc.) are, more than

likely
: >>>> not going to have the knowledge to create scripts. So, to

them,

: >>>> scripts don't make an application any more accessible than
sets.

In

: >>>> addition, the current set file features that Window-Eyes
offers

are

: >>>> all available through a GUI, meaning that you can do a massive

amount

: >>>> of customization using standard controls (dialogs, buttons,
check

: >>>> boxes, etc.). For example. setting up a user window requires
very

: >>>> little typing, but rather putting the mouse in specific
places,

and

: >>>> pressing a few hot keys. That's simple. Setting up a similar
function

: >>>> using a script requires knowledge of whatever scripting
language

might

: >>>> be used, the syntax of that language, the syntax of
communicating

with

: >>>> the API being used, and knowledge of the feature being
scripted.

Sure,

: >>>> there's more flexibility, and more control, but it requires
more

: >>>> knowledge. That's complex. People who expect applications to
work

with

: >>>> minimal intervention on their part are not going to take
advantage

of

: >>>> creating scripts any more than they currently take advantage
of

: >>>> creating set files to minimize the number of issues they run
into

with

: >>>> new applications. That's not to say that customizations
shouldn't

: >>>> exist for both new and advanced users alike.

: >>>>
: >>>> So what the heck is my point? My point is that someone stating

an

: >>>> application is not accessible because it is not customized, or

because

: >>>> set files aren't available, are going to say the same thing if

scripts

: >>>> aren't available. When in fact, an application's accessibility
is

: >>>> based more on the knowledge of the application and the
knowledge

of

: >>>> Window-Eyes. Even with sets or scripts, there's still a
learning

curve

: >>>> when discovering how to use the features built into the
customization.

: >>>> You're going to spend time learning something: set file
features,

or

: >>>> Window-Eyes features. One of those will give you access to one
: >>>> program. The other will give you access to every program.

: >>>>
: >>>> To take that a step further, making many of the applications

listed in
: >>>> the "inaccessible application list" more functional can be

done

today

: >>>> with set files. Everyone is waiting for scripting. And if it
shows

up

: >>>> one day, everyone will stop waiting for scripting, and instead

start

: >>>> waiting for scripts. My argument here (I fear it's getting
lost)

is

: >>>> that until Window-Eyes does everything but wash your socks, I
think it

: >>>> behooves people to get the most out of the documentation, the
website,

: >>>> and training courses that we offer. Window-Eyes works with
more

: >>>> applications right out of the box, even if those application's

aren't

: >>>> customized. We've heard countless stories from people using
the

: >>>> competition who claim that they can't even do basics things
(like

: >>>> navigating an application with the mouse) without some kind of

: >>>> scripting. That's very telling to me.
: >>>>

: >>>> Is there still work to do? To quote Mike,
"abso-freakin-lutely."

But

: >>>> that doesn't mean anyone is out of luck now. In fact, your
chances

of

: >>>> getting at an application are better with Window-Eyes than
anything

: >>>> else. I base that statement on what I hear first hand from
counselors

: >>>> and trainers a lot: if you use JAWS without any scripts, and
: >>>> Window-Eyes without any sets, in several different types of

: >>>> applications, Window-Eyes always provides consistent access
JAWS

does

: >>>> not. That's more of a philosophy difference than something
that's

: >>>> right or wrong. But I believe it puts the "inaccessible

application
: >>>> list" in perspective.

: >>>>
: >>>> Aaron

: >>>>
: >>>> --

: >>>> To insure that you receive proper support, please include all
past

: >>>> correspondence (where applicable), and any relevant
information

: >>>> pertinent to your situation when submitting a problem report
to

the GW

: >>>> Micro Technical Support Team.
: >>>>

: >>>> Aaron Smith
: >>>> GW Micro

: >>>> Phone: 260/489-3671
: >>>> Fax: 260/489-2608

: >>>> WWW: http://www.gwmicro.com
: >>>> FTP: ftp://ftp.gwmicro.com

: >>>> Technical Support & Web Development
: >>>>

: >>>> __________ NOD32 2313 (20070606) Information __________
: >>>>

: >>>> This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
: >>>> http://www.eset.com

: >>>>
: >>>>

: >>>
: >

: >>--
: >>To insure that you receive proper support, please include all

past

: >>correspondence (where applicable), and any relevant information

: >>pertinent to your situation when submitting a problem report to
the

GW

: >>Micro Technical Support Team.
: >

: >>Aaron Smith
: >>GW Micro

: >>Phone: 260/489-3671
: >>Fax: 260/489-2608

: >>WWW: http://www.gwmicro.com
: >>FTP: ftp://ftp.gwmicro.com

: >>Technical Support & Web Development
: >

: >>If you reply to this message it will be delivered to the original
: >>sender only. If your reply would benefit others on the list and

: >>your message is related to GW Micro, then please consider sending
: >>your message to gw-info@gwmicro.com so the entire list will

receive

it.

: >
: >>All GW-Info messages are archived at

http://www.gwmicro.com/gwinfo,

and

: >>can be searched through and sorted
: > using the search

: >>form at the bottom of the page.
: >

: >>If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, send a message to
: >>listserv@gwmicro.com and include leave gw-info in the body

: >>of the message.
: >

: >
: >

: >
: >

: > If you reply to this message it will be delivered to the original
: > sender only. If your reply would benefit others on the list and

: > your message is related to GW Micro, then please consider sending
: > your message to gw-info@gwmicro.com so the entire list will

receive

it.

: >
: > All GW-Info messages are archived at

http://www.gwmicro.com/gwinfo,

and

: > can be searched through and sorted using the search
: > form at the bottom of the page.

: >
: > If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, send a message to

: > listserv@gwmicro.com and include leave gw-info in the body
: > of the message.

: >
:

:
: If you reply to this message it will be delivered to the original

: sender only. If your reply would benefit others on the list and
: your message is related to GW Micro, then please consider sending

: your message to gw-info@gwmicro.com so the entire list will receive
it.

:

: All GW-Info messages are archived at http://www.gwmicro.com/gwinfo,
and

can be searched through and sorted using the search

: form at the bottom of the page.
:

: If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, send a message to
: listserv@gwmicro.com and include leave gw-info in the body

: of the message.
:

:
:

: --
: No virus found in this incoming message.

: Checked by AVG Free Edition.
: Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.9/832 - Release Date:

6/4/2007

6:43 PM

:
:

If you reply to this message it will be delivered to the original

sender only. If your reply would benefit others on the list and
your message is related to GW Micro, then please consider sending

your message to gw-info@gwmicro.com so the entire list will receive
it.

All GW-Info messages are archived at http://www.gwmicro.com/gwinfo,
and

can be searched through and sorted using the search

form at the bottom of the page.

If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, send a message to
listserv@gwmicro.com and include leave gw-info in the body

of the message.
If you reply to this message it will be delivered to the original

sender only. If your reply would benefit others on the list and
your message is related to GW Micro, then please consider sending

your message to gw-info@gwmicro.com so the entire list will receive
it.

All GW-Info messages are archived at http://www.gwmicro.com/gwinfo,
and

can be searched through and sorted using the search

form at the bottom of the page.
If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, send a message to

listserv@gwmicro.com and include leave gw-info in the body of the
message.

If you reply to this message it will be delivered to the original

sender only. If your reply would benefit others on the list and
your message is related to GW Micro, then please consider sending

your message to gw-info@gwmicro.com so the entire list will receive
it.

All GW-Info messages are archived at http://www.gwmicro.com/gwinfo,

and

can be searched through and sorted using the search
form at the bottom of the page.

If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, send a message to
listserv@gwmicro.com and include leave gw-info in the body of the

message.

If you reply to this message it will be delivered to the original
sender only. If your reply would benefit others on the list and
your message is related to GW Micro, then please consider sending
your message to gw-info@gwmicro.com so the entire list will receive it.

All GW-Info messages are archived at http://www.gwmicro.com/gwinfo, and
can be searched through and sorted using the search
form at the bottom of the page.

If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, send a message to
listserv@gwmicro.com and include leave gw-info in the body
of the message.

If you reply to this message it will be delivered to the original
sender only. If your reply would benefit others on the list and
your message is related to GW Micro, then please consider sending
your message to gw-info@gwmicro.com so the entire list will receive it.

All GW-Info messages are archived at http://www.gwmicro.com/gwinfo, and can be searched through and sorted using the search
form at the bottom of the page.

If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, send a message to
listserv@gwmicro.com and include leave gw-info in the body
of the message.