Chapter and Verse Blog

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?

by Penny Everett, VerseOne Accessibility Specialist

An article published not long ago in the Evening Standard talked about Jasmine Gardner's experience using Dragon Naturally Speaking. Jasmine is a journalist, and she had decided to sit back and dictate her articles using this speech-to-text software and was positively expounding the virtues of using such a program.

But before you rush out and buy this type of software, bear in mind that you have to train it to understand your voice. Unfortunately, this may take some time before you can happily sit back like Jasmine and look totally relaxed about the whole thing.

However, I have to say, if you can get past the training hurdle you’ll never look back. But as Jasmine herself says, it's quite an accomplished art to dictate straight to the screen. Somehow hands paused and hovering over a keyboard seems to give you time to think about the next sentence or two, whereas dictating straight from your original thoughts is surprisingly hard to do.

Which brings me back to the fact that this software is also for disabled users. Yes, these programs are becoming easier and easier to use, but like most assistive technology, it takes hard work and patience to become fully conversant with using them. Still, with the way Jasmine is singing its praises, she will probably get more able-bodied people to have a go too.

Do you know anyone who is adept at using Dragon Naturally Speaking?

by Penny Everett, VerseOne Accessibility Specialist

At Christmas this year we will be hitting the third anniversary of the publication of version 2.0 of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG).

Let’s face it, three years is a very long time in the IT world. So why are some organisations still referring to version 1.0 of these guidelines?

These guidelines are published by the Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI), which is part of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). They are there to help organisations to make their websites accessible to as many users as possible. The version 1.0 was originally published in May 1999, which means it was in use for nearly 10 years.

Although it is possible to conform either to WCAG 1.0 or to WCAG 2.0 (or both), the W3C recommends that new and updated content use WCAG 2.0. They also recommend that Web accessibility policies refer to WCAG 2.0.

Following these recommendations through—do we assume that any website still referring to version 1.0 hasn’t updated their website for 3 years?

Is your organisation guilty of this complacency?

by Penny Everett, VerseOne Accessibility Specialist

A CAPTCHA is that funny graphic with squiggly distorted letters which has an accompanying text box where you key-in the letters that you think you can see. You generally see a CAPTCHA before you can continue with a task such as accessing a particular document on a website, or going ahead with a log-in.

The CAPTCHA is produced in such a way that robots which trawl the internet cannot decipher the text and therefore can't infiltrate a website with "spam".

CAPTCHAs are discriminatory in relation to people with a visual or cognitive impairment (particularly dyslexics), as these users find it virtually impossible to interpret the letters presented by the CAPTCHA. Unless the service provider of the website provides an alternative method of accessing this data, other than using a CAPTCHA, the organisation may be guilty of "indirect discrimination".

A CAPTCHA would, however, be acceptable if another accessible method of continuing with the task was offered to the disabled user. Webmasters who include CAPTCHAs on their website often presume they are accessible if they offer an alternative such as "click here for an audio version". This, of course, discriminates against another set of users – particularly the older user who may have a hearing impairment as well as problems with visually deciphering the distorted text.

Have you had problems interpreting the characters in a CAPTCHA?

Have you ever tried to listen to an audio version of a CAPTCHA and given up?

by Penny Everett, VerseOne Accessibility Specialist

Did you know that if you are creating a PDF from a Microsoft Word document that the original document needs to be made accessible?

I can’t tell you how many times I have come across PDFs that aren’t accessible and which originally started out as Word documents. The trouble is, making documents accessible relies on busy people knowing some of the slightly more advanced functionality within Word.

For instance, the first step you will need to know is how to use Styles in Word. Then there are ways of writing inclusively for the cognitively impaired (such as those with dyslexia), where use of images to illustrate points is useful. Plus you need to consider use of white space, Plain English, headings, tabs, and so it goes on.

Finally, when the document is finished, you will need to know how to create a TOC (table of contents) if the document is four or more pages in length.

At VerseOne, we have a document which our clients can download that helps them to produce an accessible document. What does your organisation do?

Are you aware of what to do in order to make your Word documents accessible? Or are you one of those very busy people who just haven’t been able to find the time yet? How do you think the “Word” could be spread?