Excellent paper Neil. I agree with the previous poster; you're right on the money.
Cameron. On 5/9/12, Eugenia Firth <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello Neil. > I read your paper, and I think you're right on the money here. In the case > of GPS, I just can't envision a really good software for us that the sighted > would like as well. Sure, there are sighted people that would like a GPS > that would operate the way most of us would prefer. But, I suspect most of > them love and adore pictures. I say I can't envision it, but then this is no > flat screen for the 2010 talking here. I didn't think flat screens were > possible, and Apple showed me up and figured out how. > > Regards, > Gigi > > Eugenia Firth > [email protected] > > > > On May 9, 2012, at 5:32 AM, Neil Barnfather - TalkNav wrote: > >> Dear All, >> >> About a year or so ago now, I wrote the below short paper covering the >> topic of Accessibility verse Adaptation. >> >> Given the discussion recently on a few mailing lists I'm subscribed to >> about making various Apps accessible, I thought this might provoke a few >> individuals into considering this topic a little more. Quite often I hear >> blind and low vision users stating that something should be easily made to >> work for us as blind users... Sure, in many instances this is true, but, >> in some instances, what we need or require goes beyond simple >> accessibility feature sets, and in fact becomes an adaptation. >> >> I very much welcome any feed back on the below, I hope it may help all of >> us to have a moment of reflection over our needs, requirements and >> expectations. >> >> When is adaptation more than simple accessibility? >> >> Up until recently adaptive technology was seen solely as a method of >> altering an item, or thing, to make it usable by a blind or low vision >> user; be it a device created from the ground up to meet the specific needs >> of this user group (e.g. Braille Note) or a multipurpose software package >> such as JAWS. >> >> At present a handful of global developers produce the majority of the >> technology used by the blind; this primarily encompasses adaptive >> technologies as apposed to simply accessible technology. The equipment is >> often simply replicating the function or feature of a mainstream device, >> but with specifically targeted functionality for the blind user base >> (defined controls, tactilely strong, speech output, braille interface). >> >> >> It’s all a number game >> >> Economically speaking this macro-market has kept the cost of adaptive >> technology at a premium; owing to the large overheads and often minuscule >> consumer base for these goods. In addition the cost of these goods is >> often hyper-inflated due to the additional support and after-sales >> contacts associated with the market (rightly or wrongly). This is in >> addition to highly expensive pre-sales visits to customers—many of whom >> often have neither the monetary means to purchase, or even a genuine >> requirement for said item. The costs of bring a product to market increase >> the overall cost, and can in part explain the often notable price >> discrepancy between adaptive and non-adaptive technology on sale. To put >> this into perspective, it has been estimated that pre and after sales >> support can add in excess of 50% to the total cost of any product >> purchased. >> >> One obvious solution to this situation might be to reduce the pre-sales >> visits to those who—after vetting—display a legitimate desire for the >> product; simply limiting home demonstrations and maximising the number of >> trade shows exhibited at can contribute significantly to reducing overall >> expenditure. In addition, support services could be offered in a more >> limited manner; with additional support being a premium service for either >> new users or those with more complex requirements. >> >> Focusing specifically on numbers; the market for much adaptive technology >> is less than 0.0001% of the sighted equivalent and in many cases less than >> this. This means that—usually owing to the failure of the original >> supplier to provision for this group—a small and highly specialised elite >> have assumed the role of catering for the blind community through >> adaptation. >> >> >> Behind the times and a brighter future >> >> When you consider screen reading software packages such as JAWS or Zoom >> Text, one can easily follow the process the developers have followed; a >> steady and methodical game of catch-up, in which they clamber to make >> mainstream software usable for this user group. All this means is that >> blind users have always been a few steps—if not more—behind technological >> developments in most fields. This has obviously led to a time delay being >> common place when blind users attempt to use the latest technology and can >> often cause difficulties in the employment sector. In large owing to blind >> users often not being able to utilise either the latest software >> versions—or worse, access bespoke packages. These include, but are not >> limited to, new and innovative technologies utilised in content dispersal >> such as Ajax, HTML5 and Java—which can hinder access not only to detailed >> and comprehensive data but also fundamental information contained in >> newspapers or travel applications. >> >> The recent steps of technology companies (such as Apple) providing access >> technology as part of their core functionality has seen the start of a >> new—and much anticipated—dawn for this user group. These past few years >> have seen Apple include screen reader and magnification tools directly in >> their product range (including personal computers, portable media >> devices). This technology redefines the market due to it being access >> technology but not in itself adaptive; it simply allows access to the >> product without any additional software being necessary. Of note is the >> notion of cost (or value); many claim this technology is free of charge, >> but should more appropriately be seen as inclusive in the cost of the >> product. With the cost of many Apple products being in excess of other >> alternative off-the-shelf options, it can often be ignored that their >> offerings—once adaptive elements are factored in—can be significantly >> cheaper. >> >> The major significance of this change is that the technological >> advancements are now being made progressively in tandem with the sighted >> mainstream, or at least more in-step than previously. This is reflected in >> the proposed release of Apple’s new operating system (Lion); upon its >> release it will be accessible for all sighted and non-sighted users >> inclusively. Finally—it would seem—blind users are at the cutting edge of >> technological developments and the enhancements that come with this, and >> no longer playing catch up with their sighted peers. >> >> >> Core principles >> >> Whilst these improvements go a long way to address the discrepancy between >> the two markets, this is limited to core components (OS, core >> applications) and can give a false impression which is responsible for >> causing the widening gap between a users expectation and reality. Whilst >> blind users are aquatinted with being considered last with regards to >> developing technology, having spent decades inline waiting for their >> adaptations to be made, the door to equality has now been partially >> opened. With this comes a higher level of expectation and in some ways >> this has now superseded the reality of the current state of affairs; >> leaving to increased frustration with many technologies remaining >> inaccessible or completely unusable. >> >> The opinion of many has been obscured by the notion that when a particular >> application is partially accessible it should be relatively easy to make >> it completely accessible. An example of this would be the slew of >> GPS/navigation tools available on the iOS platform; all of which offer >> access to their apps with varying levels of success. The issue is one of >> accessibility in terms of gaining access to the on-screen content through >> technologies such as Apple’s VoiceOver. >> >> Where the discontinuity occurs is when accessibility blends with >> adaptation. >> >> The latest enhancements to devices such as the iPhone have to some degree >> or another masked the distinction between accessibility and adaptation. A >> prime example is Google Maps; a popular and free-of-charge navigation aid >> for iOs devices. A blind user might rightly, or wrongly, believe that >> their inability to use this app is purely based on accessibility >> issues—they would for the main part be wrong in this assessment. This is >> the core problem presented where accessibility meets adaptation; making a >> produce accessible can be relatively simply (labelling buttons, graphics >> and the like), but in many cases it is far more complicated. >> >> A sighted user of Google Maps visually interprets the map with their eyes, >> extrapolating the relevant and discarding the excess—what’s ahead of me, >> what’s behind me, there’s the petrol station—whereas a blind user has no >> ability to do so, and thus requires the app to carry out this >> interpretation for them. It should also then present the resulting output >> in an accessible, understandable and comprehensible manner. To focus on a >> key feature of a GPS app, many blind users would want the system to only >> report objects of note ahead of the direction of travel; this is not an >> accessibility feature but an adaptation of the core system. The sighted >> user does not require the app to carry out this function as they would do >> it themselves, hence the difference between issues of outright >> accessibility and the adaptation of feature set. Any modifications would >> in most cases be processor intensive and thus require better hardware or >> improvements in regards to resource utilisation within the software. This >> is an obvious trade-off in the sense that if a person is not applying the >> work-rate then the machine has to step in and contribute accordingly. >> >> This issue is broad and with many complications; take for example some >> very recent developments such as that of Ariadne GPS, which allows a blind >> user to explore a map of their immediate surroundings. This however >> contains no frame of reference as to geographical bearings (up, down, >> left, right). Thus, whilst the blind user may know the names of the >> streets around them, they have no context for this data besides vicinity; >> simply enabling exploration of the map by dragging their finger around the >> screen with VoiceOver reciting details of locations. >> >> It is this distinct difference between fair and rightful accessibility >> alterations (adjustments) versus actual deliberate and specific >> modification (adaptation) that requires appreciating. >> >> >> The best practice >> >> Simple accessibility alterations can often be implemented at the source >> code level and this can be done at a very low cost; making accessibility >> to all intense purposes free of charge, or at the least cost-effective to >> incorporate easily into the overall unit cost (Apple utilise this >> paradigm). To reiterate; if the accessibility elements are coded as a core >> construct during the initial design process then this bypasses the >> potentially huge costs of insertion after completion. >> >> In most instance the screen reader is able to access the varied elements >> of information on display in the app; however this usually amounts to >> basic textual information, buttons and graphics (although this is about >> their location, it also covers the concept of labelling to ensure correct >> usage). A greater understanding of the concepts of accessibility and >> adaptation is required by both user and developer alike. Blind users have >> a new inflated expectation of fully inclusive accessibility, whilst >> software developers are not only limited by their understanding of the >> issues present, but a lot of the time unaware of the blind user’s >> requirements at all. Not only do developers need to increase their >> awareness of accessibility implementation but also to expand their >> knowledge and experience so as to cover the needs of the whole user >> community. Put simply, application developers would benefit from a >> prescribed (and enforceable) accessibility guideline (standard of >> compliance). >> >> The wider issues of adaptation within technology is that developers need >> to move beyond the simple implementation of accessibility techniques and >> embrace a more in depth and rounded modification process; one borne of >> consultation and standardisation. This also ignores the fact that whilst >> many developers are meeting these basic standards, many are not and >> implementing these standards would hopefully pull more into line. >> >> What now? >> >> The reality of today’s market place is that the firms entrenched in the >> adaptive technology sphere need to reposition their services; moving from >> that of manufacturer per se, to that of modifier. To start working in >> consultation with mainstream suppliers, thus enabling them to provide >> fully accessible products that also have feature rich alterations to >> enable broad usability for the blind user. These methods could include the >> options for in-app purchasing of true adaptive layers for use alongside >> the mainstream accessibility standards; hopefully removing the need for >> any secondary devices at all. >> >> In conclusion the most prevalent change needs to come from the developers. >> With lobbying and encouragement from the government (much like with web >> accessibility), as well as larger public bodies and charities, the issue >> needs to be conveyed so as accessibility issues are handled correctly, >> with only a handful of cases requiring full adaptive changes; those cases >> include screen content that is continuously, and dynamically, generated, >> as well complex visual implementation (the most obvious product affected >> by these being GPS systems). >> >> >> External links >> >> User Experience - Accessibility (Apple) - >> http://developer.apple.com/ue/accessibility/a >> >> Regards, >> >> Neil Barnfather >> >> Talks List Administrator >> Twitter @neilbarnfather >> www.neilbarnfather.com >> www.TheOEF.org >> @TheOEF >> >> TalkNav is a Nuance, Code Factory and Sendero dealer, for all your >> accessible phone, PDA and GPS related enquiries visit www.talknav.com >> >> URL: - www.talknav.com >> e-mail: - [email protected] >> Phone: - +44 844 999 4199 >> >> >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "MacVisionaries" group. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> [email protected]. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "MacVisionaries" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MacVisionaries" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en.
