If you still can’t decide if you want to go, there might be a few passes available for walk up pricing, but that’s $100 more.

This is going to be the best flash conference that Minneapolis has ever hosted and I’m excited to be going next week. I’m sure a few of you are too.

It’s been awhile since I’ve posted an actual web-centric topic. So, here’s one about some recent accessibility related sites I’ve come across.

• Just Ask: Integrating Accessibilty Throughout Design is a blandly named, but useful online book about accessibile design provided free thanks to Adobe, SAP, RNIB (not sure what that stands for), and Mitsue-Links (a japanese information integration firm).
• Stone Deaf Pilots is a new blog focused on hearing accessibility issues. Discussions on this blog to much further than just the web, and is an interesting read for anyone interested in assistive technologies that go beyond the typical sight-impaired-centric focus.
• Open Source Assistive Technology Software is a web site “dedicated to improving Assistive Technology and computer accessibility through the power of Open Source development techniques.” The site contains an exhaustive list of open source assistive software.

Now, go back outside. They’re saying it’s going to hit 85 today!

I’ve always wondered why US currency wasn’t more intelligent (or prettier, for that matter). Other parts of the modern planet have long ago figured out this problem. Take the Euro, for instance:

Not only are the bills differently sized (from small to large) but also printed on completely different colors. not only is it easier for a blind person to figure out what they’re handing the cashier, it’s easier for everyone like me that tends to carry their cash in a crumpled wad in the pocket. $50? Ok, let me just grab this orange piece of paper here…
Other countries have included even more ways to further identify the money. Canada uses tactile markings, for instance, as well as a larger array of dollar and 2-dollar coins.

Apparently, this is not a new issue. Several web sites exist pushing for more accessible money:

http://www.ourmoneytoo.org/

http://www.blinddollars.org/

It’s tough being blind in the country and actually wanting to be a consumer.

Thanks Joe.

In February of this year, a lawsuit was filed against our own Target.com for being inaccessible:

“The complaint cites various problems with Target.com: alt-text is missing from images, preventing screen readers from describing them to blind users; purchases cannot be completed without a mouse because keyboard controls do not work; image maps are inaccessible; and headings are missing that are needed to navigate.”

Well. The motion to dismiss the case was thrown out of US District Court in California last week.

As Darrel has said many times – accessibility helps all of us. Especially as more and more of us expect to conduct transactions on devices other than desktop or laptop computers.

Since specializing in interactive content a few years ago, I’ve grown a new editor in my brain (boy, it’s getting crowded in there). This one pokes me with her red pencil as I write. She squeaks, “No one will read that! Make that sentence shorter. You’re boring people. Oh no–they’re reaching for the back button! Hurry, give them the info they need quick or they’ll leave this site forever!” She’s just trying to help, I know. And it’s important to be clear and concise. But how simple is too simple?

Sometimes, in an effort to slim down the copy to its very bones, originality and humor—important tools for connecting with people—are stripped away too. My goal as a writer is to get out of the user’s way—this is especially true for sites with a utility bent. What’s often left is soulless, albeit user-friendly text. If people don’t really read the copy, it’s okay—they’re not missing much. But if they do? Some might notice it lacks that certain spark.

But there’s always hope. Maybe users will evolve to withstand the eye strain of online reading. Or coffee will become passé, so caffeine-induced skimming will become a problem of the past. Happily, even if these things don’t happen, there are corners of the web where text can stretch out its long limbs. Yes, there are safe houses for lengthy prose, places where it can hide out and not be beaten to a bloody (but concise!) pulp. Newspaper and magazine sites. Blogs. Informational sites for products and services. Even the resources section on task-oriented, no-nonsense sites. All of these have something in common: they’re places users expect to read something longer or less direct by web standards. Which is why the wordier stuff is tolerated.

That’s all for now. That sharp pencil point is jabbing my ribs again.

Google’s Accessible Search site is a search interface for Google that returns pages that are ranked by how accessible the pages are to blind/visually impaired users. You can read more about this on their FAQ page.

So, is this a good thing? Well, if you are blind, and depend on a screen reader, then yes, this is a nice addition to your web surfing tool kit.

From a philosophical standpoint, however, I think Google missed the mark.

First of all, they’re falling into the all-to-common habit of defining ‘accessibility’ as being solely an issue of sight impairment. Which, of course, is hardly the case. Granted, Google, as a spider, probably can’t do much to analyze other accessibility issues. However, they shouldn’t have slapped the term ‘accessibility’ on the tool and should have chosen a more descriptive term such as ‘screen reader friendly’ or the like.

Secondly, why segregate the accessibility search/users from the main search? Accessibility really is about accomodating everyone…not just one particular audience. It’s also something that web sites should be rewarded for and what better way to reward them than give them better visbility on Google? If I were blind, while I’d definitely want a way to know if a site is screen reader friendly, I’d also want the full set of search results. Even if a page was difficult to use, if it had the information I was looking for, I’d want to be able to know that and decide for myself whether or not I wanted to tackle reading it.

As such, google could really improve this tool AND awareness of accessibility by integrating it with their main search page. An icon/text could be placed next to search results that emphasize the screenreader-friendly pages and even a ‘filter by…’ option to rank in the search results. As Accessibility Search is still in the Google lab, perhaps those are some features yet to come.

But then I started reading it.

Ugh.

It’s bad enough that our elected officials have very little technical knowledge and pass legislation that is completely counter intuitive, but at times I can’t blame them, as the state of tech reporting is even worse.

Take this one sentence:

“At a bare minimum, to make basic HTML-driven sites more accessible to PWDs, authors of Web content need to program an alternative text tag into their hyperlinks.”

Let me correct some of that:

• You don’t have to program alt text. It’s just markup. HTML. No programming needed.
• You don’t create an alternative text tag. You create an alt attribute.
• Text hyperlinks, if well written, can be perfectly accessible without needing an alt attribute. It’s images (and specifically what the Target case is about) that need the proper alt attributes.

Am I being pedantic? Yes. But aren’t reporters SUPPOSED to be pedantic? I expect a tech writer talking about web production best practices to…uh…actually know what they are writing.

Why is this a bad thing? Well, the article continues on to finally make the point that while accessibility is important, it’s a lot of work and if the company doesn’t want to, who are we to say they should?

In the end, the article is yet another example of people simply not getting the basic concept of what accessible design is: It is simply BETTER design. And we really shouldn’t have articles being written that promote sloppier design, should we?

All that said, there are times whether it either actually makes sense to use fly-out navigation, or, more likely, the ‘committee’ insists that you do. Some day, I’ll get around to writing that long winded article on why fly-out navigation is not a good idea so you can use it as ammo, but, until then, I thought I’d at least offer some options that are decent if one must use fly-out navigation.

When our own organization began requesting that we at least consider fly-out navigation, I began my search for a script that would work. There are literally dozens of options out there. most are bad. Real bad. Out of all the ones I’ve seen, these are the ones that have made the cut. All of these systems use javascript + CSS to style and manipulate a fully accessible, semantic set of UL lists in a very usable manner:

• UDM4 (Ultimate Drop Down Menu) | $75 per site (less when purchasing bulk licenses)

  This is perhaps the most robust out of all the menu scripts I’ve seen. This a highly versatile menu that is about as accessible as one can make a fly-out navigation system. It offers a variety of means of navigating via the keyboard using both tab keys and arrow keys. The arrow-key navigation being a unique feature I have yet to see in any other script. In terms of visual style, that can all be controlled through a nifty (if a bit obtuse) javascript configuration file that will dynamically write out the the CSS for you. It can also accomodate nearly any screen size, fully adjusting the pop-ups to fit the screen at any point. The only cons to this menu is that it is a tad pricy (priced per site) and the code is a bit heavy.

• Project Seven’s Pop Menu Magic | $90 unlimited sites (Dreamweaver Plugin)

  Project Seven has long offered a variety of great Dreamweaver plugins and templates. Their Pop Menu Magic is a fairly decent fly-out navigation script/plugin. It’s not quite as accessible as UDM’s (namely in keyboard navigating) but is still an excellent product all-around. They’ve written an article on accessiblity and fly-out navigation that, while I don’t agree 100% with, is still an excellent read.

• TwinHelix’s FreeStyle Menus | Donationware(!)

  Angus has written and impressive fly-out navigation script. In terms of usability and accessibility, it’s on-par with Project Seven’s offerings, albeit not wrapped in a nice Dreamweaver extension.

• Scubaduba’s Very Compatible DHTML Menu ASP.NET User Control | Free(!)

  This is the newest entry into my list of menus that have made the cut. This isn’t quite as nice as the others in the usability department. It’s missing the one critical feature that I find really makes a fly-out navigation menu usable: a time delay between mouse out and mouse over. This is critical in vertical menus where a person will often want to drag their mouse from a main link diagonally to the sub-menu while crossing over another top-level menu. The above 3 menus add a delay, so one can safely do that. This menu, like many, many others does not, so it can be frustrating to use. All that said, this is about as user-friendly and accessible one can get with a pre-built asp.net control. Alas, asp.net is notoriusly weak in the accessibility department if one uses the built in controls, so this is a very nice option to see.

I hope these options help if you are ever given the task of implementing a fly-out navigation system. If anyone knows of any other options that are both usable and accessible, please let me know!

They’re hoping to turn this into a class action lawsuit.

The article mentions 1.3 million people in the US suffering from vision loss. It’s a shame corporations don’t see that number as a worthwhile demographic to target (pun intended) and instead have to be sued over it.

Yet, people like numbers. And it’s something I honestly haven’t ever gotten around to digging up. I recently came across a few websites that do offer some numerical insights.

The first is the US Census Bureau’s web site, and, specifically, an article on the Anniversary of The ADA act. The key bit of info is the first paragraph, which I’ll quote here:

49.7 million
Number of people age 5 and over in the civilian noninstitutionalized population with at least one disability, according to Census 2000; this is a ratio of nearly 1-in-5 U.S. residents, or 19 percent. These individuals fit at least one of the following descriptions: 1) they are 5 years old or older and have a sensory, physical, mental or self-care disability; 2) they are 16 years old or older and have difficulty going outside the home; or 3) they are 16-to-64 years old and have an employment disability.

This is a great bit of info. Why should one worry about accessibility? Well, in just the US, we have about 50 million potential customers that would benefit directly from accessibility awareness built into your web site. That’s no to mention the many other customers who may simply prefer to access your site via alternative means (like via their PDA, for instance).

And, to add to that nice bit of statistical information is the American Foundation for the Blind’s Disability Statistics Resources page which is a nice list of all sorts of statistical accessibility information related web sites, list-servs, studies and organizations.