Chapter and Verse Blog

by Penny Everett, VerseOne Accessibility Specialist

Will this be the case that makes lax web service providers take notice of their legal responsibilities?

The RNIB have been trying to work with a low cost airline (BMIBaby) since 2010 and, despite RNIB's giving them both a full audit report and recommendations, BMIBaby has still not made any significant progress in making their web services more accessible.

So, finally, the RNIB has now served BMIBaby with legal proceedings as the website remains inaccessible to those using screen readers, or those who cannot use a mouse.

Hugh Huddy, the RNIB Campaigns Officer for Inclusive Society, said: "Blind and partially sighted customers deserve to have access to the best online prices and flight information, just as any customer of BMIBaby does. Why should those with sight loss risk missing out on a web-only deal, or be forced to ring a call centre simply because companies are failing to take accessibility standards seriously?"

Even if this case is settled out of court, it has gone public and therefore will be quoted for many years to come! So for those web service providers who don't worry about making sure their website is inclusive: "Be afraid, be very afraid."

Read the RNIB press release here.

by Penny Everett, VerseOne Accessibility Specialist

Last week the free email newsletter (E-Access Bulletin) on access to digital technologies by people with disabilities* published the following:

"The UK's largest supermarket chain has said it is taking seriously the concerns raised about the inaccessibility of its new smartphone app, and is to work with the RNIB to improve the situation."

A visually impaired user found that when she went to order her shopping using Tesco's new app, the screen reader on her iPhone said the same thing for every item. This meant that the new app was totally inaccessible for her.

The initial response of Tesco's customer service was to admit that they knew the app was inaccessible, and they were unable to refer the visually impaired user to anyone else within the organisation.

Eventually, after E-Access Bulletin contacted them, Tesco said they were taking the concerns seriously and would need to build and test and amendments to the application, which would take time to complete.

The visually impaired user pointed out that a large organisation couldn't defend themselves by saying they did not have enough resources. She went on to say:

"Ultimately it is a question of leadership. The bottom line is I feel as if I've been treated less favourably for reasons of my disability. It doesn't feel like it's been taken seriously from the top down—it doesn't feel like the decision-maker has taken an inclusive approach, so why should customer service?"

Could the same be said in your organisation? Are the decision-makers aware of the implications of the Equality Act 2010 in relation to services such as websites or mobile phone applications?

*Read the full article by E-access Bulletin, which is published by Headstar: http://www.headstar.com/eablive/?p=672.

by Penny Everett, VerseOne Accessibility Specialist

Indirect discrimination is against the law—even if it isn't intentional!

So, I can hear you say, what exactly is "indirect discrimination"?

It is best explained by giving an example:

A legal services provider places a large number of legal documents in portable document format (PDF) on its website. None of the PDFs are able to be read by a screen reader because the text has been saved in graphic format.

Now, let's face it, this company probably isn't aware that they had done anything wrong. However, they have left themselves open should a visually impaired user decide to take action because they cannot access important legal information.

If the legal services company were to be taken to court, they would have to justify why they had committed this offence. Unfortunately for them, a court of law will not accept the argument that the organisation doesn't have sufficient staff to undertake the conversion of these documents.

The moral of this story is that you need to ensure that all your PDFs are accessible. If you realise that some of your legacy documents are not, then you need to take action immediately and at the very least:

• add a statement on your website to ask users to contact you if they experience difficulty accessing any document on your website.

The next thing to do would be to look into training a member of staff to ensure that all your PDFs are accessible. Simply converting a document to PDF does not necessarily make it accessible, as the above example demonstrates.

Act Statutory Code of Practice on services, public functions and associations (PDF 908KB)

by Penny Everett, VerseOne Accessibility Specialist

Some years ago, I used to tell everyone that if you are sending the user to an external website then you should always make the new page open in a new window. Then I started to study accessibility and established that what I used to insist upon was wrong!

The reason for this is that if a blind person (a screen-reader user) clicks on a link that takes them to a new window, they cannot press the Backspace button to return to their previous window. And furthermore, if they close the new window down, they will not be focussed at the point they left the original window. This is why I state that opening links in new browser windows disorientates these users. It can also confuse the cognitively impaired.

In addition to the above, any link that opens in a new window should say so—in other words, the Content Author should not let the user experience any surprises.

The latest Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG 2.0) published by W3C WAI state:

3.2.2 On Input: Changing the setting of any user interface component does not automatically cause a change of context unless the user has been advised of the behaviour before using the component. (Level A)

Specific Benefits of Success Criterion 3.2.2:

• This Success Criterion helps users with disabilities by making interactive content more predictable. Unexpected changes of context can be so disorienting for users with visual disabilities or cognitive limitations that they are unable to use the content.
• Individuals who are unable to detect changes of context are less likely to become disoriented while navigating a site. For example:
• Individuals who are blind or have low vision may have difficulty knowing when a visual context change has occurred, such as a new window popping up. In this case, warning users of context changes in advance minimizes confusion when the user discovers that the back button no longer behaves as expected.
• Some individuals with low vision, with reading and intellectual disabilities, and others who have difficulty interpreting visual cues may benefit from additional cues in order to detect changes of context.

Do you feel you can now argue strongly with anyone that your links should not open in a new window?

by Penny Everett, VerseOne Accessibility Specialist

Unlike alternative text, which is added to images for screen-reader users, title text is for sighted users and can be added to both an image and a text link, as well as other web page elements. Provided that you are using one of the main browsers, you will see any title attributes on the web page as tool tips when you roll your mouse over the page element. For example, if you roll your mouse over the following link: The title text attribute you should see the words "also known as a tool tip".

The title text attribute is typically used with the following elements: an image, a button, a text link, and a form control. Its purpose is to provide essential information. It is not generally used if it is felt that the element is self-explanatory and any additional information is unnecessary.

Title text can be read by some of the more modern screen-reading software but is not generally a default setting. Many blind users are unaware that they are able to listen to the title text. Some software will only let the blind user listen to either the title text or the alternative text, but not both. Blind users aren't the only ones who will miss out when it comes to title text—the keyboard-only user will not see a tool tip either. Users who choose to view web pages in text format only will also be unaware whether or not a tool tip has been added to any of the images.

The above creates a problem, in that we should give all users an equal experience. All I can advise is that if you feel it is necessary to add additional information to an element for sighted users, then go ahead. But you must make sure that users who will not see the tool tip are informed of this essential information through other means than via the title text attribute.

One of the worst things you can do with title text is to repeat the alternative text or link text. This means that the blind users who use fully functional screen-reading software, which reads both these attributes to the user, would have to endure listening to both sets of text. I often see websites with elements clearly labelled and the tool tip repeating the same text. This practice is absolutely pointless, as only sighted users can see the tool tip. I recently viewed a web site where all 50 menu item links had repeated the link text in the title attribute.

Are you aware of a website that has done this?