Facebook is working together with the American Foundation for the Blind (AFB) to make its social networking service more accessible to users who are blind or visually impaired. In a company blog post, the non-profit organization’s President, Carl Augusto, explains which problems visually challenged users encounter when surfing the web and how they’re able to overcome these issues with the help of website publishers, developers and designers.
This makes sense from Facebook’s perspective too, of course. There are a lot of visually impaired people on the planet, and they want to connect to their friends, relatives and peers just as much as you and me.
According to stats provided by the AFB, there are over 20 million Americans who have reported experiencing significant vision loss.
Augusto writes:
You may be wondering how people with vision loss use computers or surf the web. The answer is quite simple: People who are blind or visually impaired use a screen magnification program to enlarge fonts in order to optimize the screen for reading, or they use a screen reading program that reads the text aloud. These are quick, efficient and helpful solutions — that is, if the websites and computer programs are properly designed.
The challenge is that not all Web pages are compatible with screen readers and magnifiers. When a website is built without regard to accessible design, screen reading software cannot interpret the information, which prevents the blind person from accessing the site. Social networking sites present some especially difficult challenges. For instance, images are an important part of the site experience, but it is rare that photos get described. Even while in the middle of reading a page, comments or links can change in ways that are undetectable to the screen reader or fall outside the viewing window of screen-magnification.
Facebook has been working with the organization for 2 years, and so far this had led to a number of improvements which are listed here. In the blog post, Augusto writes that they’re also working together with Facebook to implement some design changes that will make the site more usable for people with visual impairments. I have a feeling they won’t be starting Facebook Groups and Polls against these changes.
I quickly looked for pages on MySpace and Bebo where they indicate that they’re committed to making the user experience for visually impaired members better, but didn’t immediately find anything. Google, on the other hand, tackles usability issues extensively, and is for example experimenting with a custom search engine for blind or visually challenged users.
We’re not here to lecture anyone, but if you’re building websites and Web applications, you might want to keep into consideration that there are millions of people who could potentially be using them, provided you make it possible for them to do so. AFB Consulting can help you with that.
Good for Facebook on this one.
Yeah, I appreciate the work being done by Facebook on this thing..
http://www.smartbloggerz.com
sdgasdgasdgad
sadgsag
Please pardon my ignorance, but can someone explain to me how this works?
How can a website be configured for the blind? Is the content read to you by some text to speech or text to braille technology? And how can you configure photos for the blind?
I really welcome all efforts to bring greater access to the web for all people, and I really would be interested in learning more.
Anjali
My aunt has retinitis pigmentosa (RP) and I know she’ll really appreciate this.
Follow me now @ http://twitter.com/IanMikutel
It’s about time though – their accessibility has been inexcusably dire for years
Anybody have an idea what it would cost to make a site accessible to the blind and visually impaired?
Would like to do this for our site but don’t have the faintest idea what it might cost. Assume we’re smaller than Facebook but bigger than a brochure site.
Any help would be appreciated.
Regards,
George
George, It’s not something that you can put a cost on. People like myself would argue that it’s just the proper way to build websites.
It really depends on what your own site is like at the moment.
I agree David. …and I don’t know why all the kudos to Facebook for doing what they should have been doing all along.
Bolting on accessibility as an additional task at the end of development and later is pretty expensive, since it involves retrofitting all the mistakes from the development cycle, including architecture decisions and database schema decisions.
Depending on the complexity of the front-end markup and how tightly it is coupled to mid-tier or backend data structures is one of the key indicators. Changes that can be done in HTML, CSS and JavaScript alone are a lot easier to deal with. But as soon as database tables or webservices need to change to cater for extra information (like alternative text for an image), then it gets expensive really quickly.
One approach I’ve adopted before is to just trash all the frontend code and write it from scratch properly. Sometimes this has needed backend/server-side changes, sometimes not.
The other difficulty and complexity is when the design forces an inaccessible approach – for example, key components needing a drag-and-drop interface without designing a mouseless way of achieving the same effect – that really means going back to the drawing board and thinking through the design properly.
So costs of bolting on accessibility after product development depends on where the accessibility issues are, what’s involved in fixing them, and how many parts of a web application need repairing/redevelopment.
Probably the best course of action at this point is to bring in an accessibility consultant to document the accessibility issues around the currently running site. Then your developers taking that report and estimating the time required to fix these issues.
When web standards and particularly accessibility are considered during the design and build stages, the incremental costs aren’t that significant. With most good web developers you get it as part of the normal development process. But you do need to identify accessibility issues arising from design decisions – cos those are expensive to rectify.
George, Isofarro hit the nail on the head.
Accessibility and web standards have their own major following. There is a particular kind of web developer out there who starts at accessibility and works up from there. Trying to do the reverse is pretty challenging.
One helpful technique is to view your website without any styling (no CSS) and make sure the plain-text version is clean and readable.
I prefer to use Javascript sparingly, since it often causes accessibility problems. And when I do use it, I tie it to my CSS, manipulating class attributes, etc. as opposed to manipulating page content.
Check out the Web Standards Project. They have tons of great info on the subject.
http://www.webstandards.org/
George- There is lots of great information available on how to get started on making a website accessible. I recommend starting with this great introduction from WebAIM:
http://www.webaim.org/intro/
George, for website like Agoracom dot com (assuming) –
Fixing only at the interface level won’t be expensive. Main objective is to make screen reader to understand the web page. Fixation can be done faster and can be cheaper. It can be done in few thousands.
Also have a look at Deque World Space and its very efficient in fixing Accessibility compliance.
http://www.sugg...essibility.html
We’d (www.textic.com) happily quote you for making your site speech enabled, but as the comments above suggest, the design is also a crucial consideration…
Good one, it’s always a good idea to target not just those who are able but also for those who needs a little help.
that would be good another of facebook step towards the new arena.
- Expertz
Very needed and about time! I have about 10 friends on Facebook that are blind and I know they are struggeling against a lot off barriers and messy code. Mobile client is quit ok.
Couple of things.
Captcha is a big impediment to the accessibility of social networking site sites, of course. And while Google, after a lot of prodding from disabled people and groups who represent disabled people, added audio captcha, it is quite difficult to use because the audio has been muddied by background noise. Accessibility features should not be praised merely for existing. They need to work.
And lay off the THEY, when referring to visually impaired people. The implication here is that you, by covering this issue (thanks) and Facebook by addressing it (thanks again, but we’ll see what actually comes of these efforts) are doing something for people who are unlike yourselves. Replace “visually impaired” in your article with “black people” and see how it reads. Simply refer to people who are visually impaired or blind without erecting the wall between those of US who are your readers and THEY who benefit from the blessings to be bestowed upon them?
Shelly, a fluent writer of English must use the word “they” to refer to a group to which they do not belong. Its use does not have “[t]he implication” but the actual fact that the writer doesn’t belong to the group.
There’s an interesting and already available alternative to screen readers that I thought I might mention.
On my blog I use a (free) service from Odiogo.com which converts my writing into a downloadable or streamable MP3. This is neat either for those who like podcasts, or, obviously, for those who have difficulties to read and would rather listen to something. (the text to speech generation is actually fairly good)
Now, this might or might not apply to FB in particular, but this is certainly something that sites & blogs may consider as a part of their accessibility policy.
Agreed, but remember that audio generation of text is not the same as screen reader access. Blind and visually impaired people need the use of a screen reader or screen magnifier to get that content you produced.
I am as sympathetic to the needs of disabled people as the next person, but I really think that Facebook needs to focus on improving the hobbled together mess they have right now before worrying about getting the site compliant with reader and disabled navigation conventions.
Seriously, think about it, the slightly visually impaired asside – who can just use the IE or FF zoom features. Blind or seriously visually impaired people rely on readers that basically read back what is on the screen. I don’t know about you, but I already get p-ed off at Facebook’s ridiculousness, and I can see everything perfectly fine. Would you really want a reader to read back the mess that is facebook?
The best thing that facebook can do as the first step in this direction, is to improve the paths, UI, and design.
Trust me, blind / seriously visually impaired people…. you will be torturing yourself if you have Facebook, in its current state, read back to you.
I totally agree with you. Even if it’s in the back of there mind, if they actually cleaned up the Facebook user experience it would massively improve accessibility. In it’s current state, I just can’t imagine using it as heavily as I did, even with the last redesign. It’s trying to be twitter when twitter does a fine job of that.
I think you’re both missing the point here. What you’ve said about Facebook’s mess and user experience is opinion – opinion I happen to agree with, actually – but still highly subjective.
What is not debatable at all is that Facebook is horribly inaccessible for anyone using assistive technologies, to the point where for a lot of people it’s not usable in the slightest. Sure, these people might get fed up with all the FB updates and the mess being read out to them, but at least they would have the option to take part if they wished.
That’s really what all this is about – equality of choice and access for everyone. I don’t think this is low priority at all, though I would certainly agree that Facebook needs a clean up.
Are they going to stop presenting your friends’ email addresses as images with no alt text in the name of “privacy”? They’re completely inaccessible to blind or visually challenged users.
I’m surprised they haven’t been threatened with a lawsuit over it.
From what I’ve seen, blind and visually impaired people more likely then sited people IMPO become heavy application users. I know this at least holds true for me and the blind people I hang around with. This facebook announcement is a great start to bringing the accessibility challenges to the mass scriptor or programmer.
way to go facebook
Webvisum (google it up) is a popular and free firefox plugin which aids accessibility in may aspects.
Amongst other things, it solves CAPTCHAs for blind users, which appears to be its most popular feature.
Apps on facebook, especially certain games, appear to be infested with CAPTCHAs.
I’m sorry, but I cannot read the accessibility page you linked to. Does Facebook have one that is accessible?
Facebook is the hardest website I’ve found to read. As a contrast, TechCrunch is VERY accessible.
I applaud Facebook for taking the initiative to make the social networking site accessible to individuals who are visually impaired. In doing so, I sincerely hope Facebook also makes the site accessible to individuals with other disabilities – those who are Deaf or hard of hearing, those with mobility impairments, and those with cognitive impairments. Web accessibility benefits more than only individuals with visual impairments.
Exactly, Glenda! There are those of us who use voice recognition software due to mobility or dexterity disabilities. It’s not a matter of one constituency versus another (e.g., blind or vision impaired versus dexterity impaired) but about being inclusive – during the design stage – of people of all abilities and disabilities.
In no case should accessibility be an add-on feature, it should be one that’s built-in from the start.
Gary and others, I completely agree that accessibility should be included in the concept and design phase. Otherwise, its like adding an elevator once the building is up. But…sometimes reality bites! Better now than never.
What…? Facebook *wasn’t* usable by the blind before?
Target settled a lawsuit on this topic:
http://webaim.o...awsuit-settled/
So…why is it that Facebook finally moving this direction isn’t being spat upon as “those scumbags were evil incarnate for making the site unusable for a large section of the population?”
Instead, the comments are like fanboy BS saying “good on them” when in reality, it’s a MASSIVE problem that they weren’t accessible in the first place.
yes. because all popular websites are accessible to the visually impaired. all restaurants cater to the blind by printing braille menus. all books are available in braille versions at your local bookstore. money has braille on it so the visually impaired can tell how much they’re spending.
seems like some people are impossible to please.
I am very glad that facebook is finally taking the necessary steps to become fully accessible for people who are blind. My jaws screen reader does not always work well with facebook, and I believe that it is about time that something is being done about this.
Thanks for linking to us. AFB is really excited to be working with Facebook, and today we have more big news on the accessibility front. AFB Consulting recently launched our new Accessibility Assurance Program with Marriott International as its leading participant (http://www.afb....DocumentID=4701). Our hope is that more companies will commit to improving their sites for people with disabilities.
Marc – thanks for the comment. We are excited to be partnered with the AFB in the new AAP program. We are commited to making marriott.com a more engaging channel for all of our users. Getting user feedback is a huge step in meeting this chellenge. I would encourage other corporations to make similiar commitments.
For those who are curious, there are a lot of ways blind people use web sites such as listening to speech reading the text of a site, using screen magnification, using talking cell phones, and using devices that convert the text of web pages into Braille. I was born blind and have used a computer since 1980. While our technology can’t describe photos, we can handle forms, tables, lists, links, and even frames if they’re needed for content. You don’t have to totally redesign your site to make it accessible, and it doesn’t have to cost a lot of money either unless you have a site as complex as Facebook.
I don’t want anyone to rewrite a site from scratch to make things work. Building accessibility into a site can be pretty easy. There are some easy, low-tech ways to make a site work better without hiring a programmer. If you’re running a personal or small business site, these tips can help you make things work without breaking your bank.
One thing you can do is use the “alt” attribute on images of things you think we might need to know about, things like your logo, images of your products, and definitely on images that people click to make things happen on your sites, like buttons or graphical links. Our speech and Braille programs can read the alt text to us and can use keystrokes to simulate mouse clicks on buttons, links, and image maps. If you use the alt text, we’ll hear something like “picture of our Ford pick-up” instead of “graphic 19244trck.jpg.”
Another thing you can do is to use label tags when you’re making forms for customers to fill out. If you label your form with something like “name”, “address”, and such you will make it possible for us to know what to type in each box. If you use a picture or screenshot to show us what to do, we won’t hear anything and will be confused. If you’re submit button is a graphic, please, pretty please, label it either with alt text or at least give the file a name like submit_button.gif so we’ll know what it is. This alone can help in such a major way. If your form’s buttons aren’t labeled at all and are just pictures, we can’t proceed. At that point, many people just leave the site, while others will call your customer service line for help if they can find the information. Either way, they’re not doing what you need them to do, which is to fill out your form.
Finally, if you like to put your important content in flash, consider creating either a separate page or a text block below the flash for blind people to read. Our technology can handle some flash, but it can’t handle anything that is a picture, screenshot, or text that is part of an image such as what happens if you scan a brochure and just post the image of it on your site. You don’t have to make a whole text-only site for us. Just use existing HTML tags to label important things so our screenreaders or Braille programs have some clues to follow. If you’ll do some of these things, you might find that customers who are elderly or who have other disabilities respond well too. You’ll also have an edge over your competitors in providing a quality site experience because blind people tend to refer each other to sites where our technology works and where we can participate.