On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 3:54 PM, Alex Jurgensen` <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Hi,I undrstand your point, but the current system appears to address a > variety of issues. We have highspeed and modem clients, blind and sighted > users, there are many different groups. We are developing a product that > will be targeted towards screen readers as a browsing mode for the current > system. I fell, after testing the current system, and so does my team at > GLBase, that the decition to have an accessible screen reader for visual > impairments is to hard from the original system. The university bought the > source code, and is having a whole lot of trouble trying to get it working > for sighted users as it is, adapting existing looks and feels, which kater > to the widest spectrum possible. Unfortunetly the developers of the code > didn't think of screen readers when designing the code as they made it har > as anything to read. I man, they duplicated every link, made contravercy > between to of the same links, and a whole other coding nightmare. The > decition comes after testing, and after the proposal to make the university > accessible for the blind. > > Remember, my power is very limited as far as what my team does, and dealing > with deffness and dislecksia are not looked at by my team. I regretfuly say > that developing a screen reader version as a browsing mode, which is > ultimately our goal, is the goal of this project. We have removed most of > the elements, stacked them differently and provided the same content in a > different format. We don't want to discriminate, far from it my fellow mail > listers,. We at the AWEBSIGHT Advocacy Group of BC, Canada, strive to make > the world more accessible to everyone in the best way possible. > > Thanks for your words of wisdom, > Alex, > > > > On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 8:57 AM, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Alex Jurgensen` wrote: >> >>> I spoke to my senior programer about my issue, and I received the >>> response >>> that we need a simple, compact interface optimized for screen readers and >>> modifying the existing source code would take several years to do. >>> >> >> Maybe this should be approached from the opposite angle. >> >> You have a current system, which is inaccessible to screen reader users >> (and likely others too - has any evaluation been done of that?). You have a >> proposal to build a new system, which provides the same core content and >> functionality but is screen reader accessible. (If it doesn't provide the >> same core content and functionality, and it is possible to build an >> accessible system to provide it, then blind users are still being >> discriminated against.) >> >> At work, I happen to deal with large websites, am familiar with the >> problems of trying to put in radical fixes to legacy code, and recognize >> some potential advantages to beginning afresh. >> >> Rather than suggesting the current, cranky system should be fixed, perhaps >> the best approach is to build up towards the content, functionality, and >> ultimately look-and-feel (or at least, the goods bits of look-and-feel) of >> the current system from a new accessible base. >> >> Of course, this would involve considering the needs of all users, not just >> sighted and blind users as radically distinct groups, which they aren't. >> (They are actually more like a spectrum or even a kaleidoscope, with >> offshoots into all sorts of other disabilities that an educational >> institution should be thinking about in its service provision, like >> deafness, dyslexia, and motor disabilities.) >> >> -- >> Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis >> >> > > > -- > Alex A.AWEBSIGHT administrator > AWEBSIGHT web team > "Blindness is a gift, not a disability." > B.C unit > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > http://www.VisionMail.uni.cc/ > -- Alex A.AWEBSIGHT administrator AWEBSIGHT web team "Blindness is a gift, not a disability." B.C unit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.VisionMail.uni.cc/
