RE: [SEC508] Can AJAX find harmony on agency Web sites?

["Barrett, Don" <Don.Barrett@ed.gov>]

Well, in the interest of friendly discussion, I take issue with a couple
of points.

First of all, since there is no case law on whether or not 1194.31 is
used "all of the time" as you suggest, there is no clear-cut answer as
to whether or not it should be.  It's not just "some" who say .31 only
applies to technologies not covered by the technical standards, it's the
Access board who initially made that determination; at least, that was
Doug's position way back when.  So, when you say that .31 applies all
the time, I say more power to you if you can get that to stick but many
Feds just don't do that and it might not hold up in court -- but who
knows.  Actually, I would be thrilled if .31 did apply all of the time;
then, we would use it and cover everything from Word documents to
anything else we wanted to cover.

Second, the presence of information on the screen in a "Not obvious"
form does not violate a standard.  In other words, you are making "prior
knowledge" of text appearing on the screen a requirement and a measure
of "functional text," and although I perceive it to be a usability
nightmare, it's on the screen, it's readable via the screen reader, so
technically, it is compliant albeit barely.

Actually, your comparing it to the skip navigation standard is
appropriate, since the skip nav requirement enhances usability, not
accessibility.  Believe me, I'd love it if .31 carried the same weight
as the Part B standards, but if we didn't have them, pages would be just
as accessible, just much less efficient and thus less usable.
 
Part of the problem is that page changes can occur in two major ways:
from user initiated actions, or just because, such as in a slowly
scrolling banner.  I think that if pages change as a result of user
initiated actions, the changes are accessible even if the screen reader
doesn't have prior knowledge; however, I will agree with you that if you
have changing information that just changes automatically without user
involvement, this may or may not be functional text (I still haven't
decided)> LOL!

Don

-----Original Message-----
From: sec508-admin@trace.wisc.edu [mailto:sec508-admin@trace.wisc.edu]
On Behalf Of Jonathan Avila
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 6:26 PM
To: sec508@trace.wisc.edu
Subject: RE: [SEC508] Can AJAX find harmony on agency Web sites?

Don, you say there is no standard to mandate indication of new text?
What about Section 1194.31A and B?  I think people forget about the
functional performance criteria and some say they are only applicable if
no other standards apply.  However, section 31 is applicable all of the
time.  If a person is not able to use E&IT because a limitation that is
not addressed then I would have concerns about its compliance.

I also have to disagree with you regarding "Sighted people have to look
down the page" and thus it isn't an issue for visually impaired to read
down the page.  The prime example of this is when a field appears prior
on the page after you perform an action.  Visually this is very obvious
but to a non-sighted person this is not obvious and would raise red
flags for compliance under 1194.22L and 1194.31A and B.  This issue is
similar to the skip navigation link issue.  

Jonathan 

-----Original Message-----
From: sec508-admin@trace.wisc.edu [mailto:sec508-admin@trace.wisc.edu]
On Behalf Of Barrett, Don
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 12:58 PM
To: sec508@trace.wisc.edu
Subject: RE: [SEC508] Can AJAX find harmony on agency Web sites?

You are right on the money.  Stand L of 1194.22 is one of the very few
which require screen reader testing since the functionality of text
depends upon which event handlers the screen reader deals with
successfully.

What is probably very controversial in the blindness community is
whether or not a page refresh is required to say something is 508
compliant; I say no way.  For example, suppose you have an AJAX
calculator and you enter 45+778 and hit enter.  Now, the answer appears
below the problem, and if you arrow down, you can read it with no
problem, but the screen reader doesn't tell you beforehand that the
answer is there; in other words, there is no refresh and no indication
that new information has been placed on the screen.  Is this a big
usability nightmare?  Sure it is; but it is also compliant since the
text is functional if you arrow down the screen.  After all, a sighted
person has to look down the screen in the same way that we have to arrow
down.
Some will respond that if you don't know the text has been placed there,
it isn't compliant; not true, the4re is no standard that mandates that
the screen reader tell you in advance that text has been placed on a
page.


Don Barrett
Section 508 Coordinator
U.S. Department of Education
(202)-205-8245
don.barrett@ed.gov

-----Original Message-----
From: sec508-admin@trace.wisc.edu [mailto:sec508-admin@trace.wisc.edu]
On Behalf Of Sailesh Panchang
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 12:12 PM
To: sec508@trace.wisc.edu
Subject: [SEC508] Can AJAX find harmony on agency Web sites?

With reference to article on accessibility of AJAX apps:
http://www.fcw.com/article95257-07-17-06-Print&printLayout
I generally support the view, " code to the standard, not to the screen
reader,". But how do you reconcile  this to the S508 para (l0 mandate,
"...
the information provided by the script shall be identified with
functional text that can be read by assistive technology" ? Ability to
use the application with At is the final test in this case, is it not?

Also even many sighted users may be looking at the keyboard as they type
and not realize that AJAX has refreshed a part of the screen.  

Accessibility issues with DHTML and AJAX are summarized  in the Road-map
doc from PFWG http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/roadmap/DHTMLRoadmap040506.html

Sailesh Panchang
Senior Accessibility Engineer
Deque Systems Inc. (www.deque.com)
11180 Sunrise Valley Drive, Suite #400,
Reston VA 20191
Phone: 703-225-0380 (ext 105)
E-mail: sailesh.panchang@deque.com


_______________________________________________
SEC508 mailing list
SEC508@trace.wisc.edu
http://trace.wisc.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/sec508


_______________________________________________
SEC508 mailing list
SEC508@trace.wisc.edu
http://trace.wisc.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/sec508

_______________________________________________
SEC508 mailing list
SEC508@trace.wisc.edu
http://trace.wisc.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/sec508