When creating HTML5 animations, is there a technique that can be used to "synchronize" the alternate text so that screen-readers reads the given element that appears the moment it appears (or triggered by an event / timeline-driven)?
Ideally, something that I could invoke with GSAP (using it as the animation library for my projects).
Or could such a thing just make the screen-reader speak and pause repeatedly too often, ending up sounding more frustrating than actually enhancing the experience of the user? Would I be better off just to paste essentially a "script" of all the animation that is going on, on one line in the alt="..." attribute?
EDIT:
This question is mostly targetted for HTML5 ads - so I'm assuming there has to be a non-invasive way to screen-read the events happening in an animation without requiring the user to actually click the ad to gain focus (which would involuntarily open up the link the ad refers to). At the same time, wouldn't it be some sort of user violation to "force focus" on the ad's dynamic text if the user is in middle of reading an article / only interested to another area of the page? This raises so many other questions!
If you create a live region with aria-live like this,
<div role="region" id="announce" aria-live="polite">
And update the content inside with a JavaScript on the right time, screen reader will announce the content whenever it gets updated.
Here's more information on live region.
https://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-wai-aria-practices-20080204/#LiveRegions
If you want to hide the content for sited users, you can use this technique.
https://webaim.org/techniques/css/invisiblecontent/
Maybe you can also create a button to turn on/off the announcement, so screen reader users can choose if they want to hear the description in real time or not.
Related
Recently I have come across a major issue with Phaser game framework which is regarding Web Accessibility. Screen readers are not able to read the instructions showing in the Instructions Pop-up in games while playing game.
Scenario: Before playing game user should click ok and accept to agree the rules before game start which is nightmare for screen readers not able to pick up the text and instruct the user to take action. Due to this users are being stuck up to play the game which is made so simple interactions
Text written inside the canvas directly with .add.text(...) creates a Phaser.GameObjects.Text that is not readable by a screen reader (is not even selectable!)
You could use Phaser.GameObjects.DOMElement instead.
I've checked one of my projects and text written inside DOMElement can be properly read by screen reader (test done with Screen Reader browser extension by chrome.google.com)
EDIT:
I found this interesting conversation (from 2017) HTML5 Canvas is the least accessible thing to be put on the Web since Flash that is worth reading.
As a solution (or hack for someone) they propose use of DOM element that can be read by screen reader, or the usage of alt text for the canvas.
Further research bring me to this blog post HTML Accessibility that describes how to use aria-label and role attributes to let screen readers read canvas' context.
I manage a lot of ads on a website. I want to make the ads accessible, and I've been been researching this but there is little information out there currently about how to make ads accessible. While I look into this further, I'd like to make them at least invisible to screenreaders, so that they are skipped over and ignored.
The ads are usually in the following format:
<div class="ad">
<iframe>
<html><body><div>Various more child divs here</div></body></html>
</iframe>
</div>
Is it appropriate to use aria-hidden="true" on the parent div? I was reading that would apply to all child divs, which is great, but also that it is intended for items that are not visible to anyone, not just those using screenreaders. But the ad is visible -- I just don't want screenreaders to bother with it.
Ideally I would also like to make it so that the entire ad element is not part of the tab order and can be skipped over, but tab-index="-1" does not apply to child divs like aria-hidden="true" does, and as such I would need to apply it to all the child divs, which is difficult. I'm not sure if there is a way around this.
So this comes down to three questions:
Can I use aria-hidden=true on the parent div?
Is there a way to use tab-index=-1 to make sure the entire ad element gets skipped over when tabbing?
Is there anything else I should consider?
yes, aria-hidden=true will prevent screenreaders to read that
you can apply the same method I indicated in How can restrict the tab key press only within the modal popup when its open? to disable keyboard interaction (which is very simple with jQuery UI)
Accessibility concerns a lot of people where blind people using screenreaders are a small part of them. So your adds won't become magically accessible by removing them to screenreaders or from keyboard navigation.
If you put ads on your website, then you suppose people will want to click or navigate to them. How can someone who navigate with keyboard click on your ads if you remove it from the tabindex? How someone with low vision will be able to read the content of your ads using a screenreader if you remove it from your accessibility tree? It's for that exact reason that aria-hidden should be used to match the visible state of the element.
There are much more people with low vision or using keyboard navigation than full blind people using screenreaders.
I am currently attempting to make my application be more user friendly to those with difficulty seeing. As one would expect, I am using JAWS to test my application. Most of the issues I have run in were relatively easy to fix, except I am stumped on one.
In my application, I have advertisements injected via an iframe and I want JAWS to ignore them, but I still want them to display (display:none is out of the question). Is there any way to have JAWS completely ignore an element and all of its children?
I saw a few posts leading towards speak:none, but that does not work. It does seems to ignore the parent div, but it will instead reads the content of the iframe child.
Any tips would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you.
Good for you for testing your web application for accessibility.
JAWS already has the feature built-in to ignore ads by temporarily or permanently ignoring inline iframes.
Testing that your site works nicely with that feature toggled should represent the typical experience for a JAWS user.
Banner Ads
If you want JAWS to temporarily ignore banner ads on a page, do the following:
Press INSERT+V.
Press I until you select "Inline Frames Show - On."
Press the SPACEBAR to choose "Inline Frames Show - Off."
Press ENTER.
To have JAWS permanently ignore all inline frames, including banner ads that you might encounter:
In Internet Explorer, press INSERT+F2.
Select Settings Center, and press ENTER.
Focus is in the Search edit box. Type in "ignore inline" without the quotes.
Press DOWN ARROW to move to Ignore Inline Frames in the filtered results of the tree view in Settings Center.
Press SPACEBAR to check or uncheck the check box.
Press TAB to move to the OK button and activate it with the SPACEBAR. The changes are made and saved. Settings Center closes.
http://www.freedomscientific.com/Training/Surfs-up/difficult_pages.htm
The other points mentioned on the above link will give you a good idea of additional bad practices to avoid.
Give the ARIA attribute aria-hidden="true" to the outer div of the iframe. This should ideally hide the the content from JAWS.
Give the aria attribute role="presentation" to any element you want ignored. Jaws will not read them.
I'm working on a web application where we have a modal panel/dialog popup to collect user data. The form within the panel has grown large and we've suggested splitting the form across multiple tabs, but our client has suggested adding scrollbars within the modal panel.
Are there usability issues with scrollbars within a modal panel? I believe it's a bad practice but I'd like other opinions.
Thanks,
Glen
Update:
I'll explain the scenario in more detail. We have a search page where search result items can be saved (copied into a another area of the system). Additional information can be saved with this items (e.g. additional comments, assignment to other buckets - I can't get into any more detail than that). When a user wants to save a search result item, they can check one or more items and click a save button - that's when our modal panel popups.
Originally, the users were taken to a separate page and they followed a series of pages. Our clients felt this was time consuming, so we changed the page to use a modal panel.
I'm not 100% sure using a modal panel is the best design, but that's what we have now. I welcome any other ideas.
Well, I gotta ask, if you have a modal form that's so long, shouldn't it be made into its own page?
I mean, the whole point of modal dialogues is to tell the user something he needs to know (which are usually disregarded and are annoying) or to get some information from the user that is necessary before proceeding.
You say your form is for gathering user input. If it's something the user must enter before proceeding (as in a part of a checkout flow or something like that), then I would say it's probably best to dedicate an entire page to the flow.
If it's something that's more of a "log in here before proceeding with what you're doing" kind of thing, again, I think it would make more sense for it to be its own page that brings you back to the page you were on before you entered it once you're done filling out the form. That's how the Stack Overflow human-verification page works.
If it's something annoying like "give us your feedback about the site", then it shouldn't be modal at all but rather an easily-dismissed (dare I say it?) pop-up window.
Modal dialogues really should be kept as brief as possible. If brevity is impossible, and the dialogue really must be modal, then I think it would make more sense to create a flow of pages that must be filled in before the next one can be accessed. Like a checkout: you need to add products to a cart before adding shipping information, and you need shipping information before you can determine the cost of the shipment. That kind of thing.
But without knowing the exact nature of your modal dialogue I can't tell you exactly which way would be best.
EDIT: Aha! Your clients felt this was time consuming, eh? This is the type of situation where you should do a very quick and dirty live usability test to see which way is actually better. Grab some people from down the hall, show some of them the modal way (with scrolling) of doing it and show others the old (non-modal) way of doing it and see what they have to say.
(Ideally you are recording the session and the screen, and you make sure to not let your own personal preferences show through. Just ask them to use the system while you watch to see how well they perform the task. Use the recording to time both methods to see if one way really is faster than the other.)
You shouldn't ever make a usability decision that goes against the norm (the norm in this case being "large forms merit their own pages") without making sure that it actually is more usable the abnormal way. When it comes to usability, the norm is usually the norm because it's usable (but not always, which is why you must test). If the client fights back, you'll at least have evidence that they're going against hard empirical evidence that what they want is silly.
Ultimately, though, the clients are the ones paying the bills. If you can't get them to see reason then you'll have to make the most of what they tell you. If the form must be in a modal dialogue, then you can at least try to hide non-essential fields under the fold (if there are non-essential fields) so that the majority of users will never have to scroll.
Make sure the buttons to submit the form (or whatever it is that you need to do with the form) are visible no matter where the user has scrolled. A really bad idea would be to put all the required fields at the top and then force the user to scroll down anyway to hit the submit button. That's just rude.
It seems to make sense to put a modal window here--I assume you're doing it as a layer on the page. But what it sounds like is that it's getting crowded, and you're looking at ways to manage the ever-increasing array of UI elements.
To answer your initial question about scrollbars, no, they are not verboten. However, as another responded asserted, you should never design action UI elements within the scrolling area.
It sounds as if some good user research could be useful here. What items are important to users. Which items are required and which are optional? Can they be categorized?
Some people suggest that tabs are useful for categorization when the number of UI items overflows a dialog box. In this case, though, I think this would be a bad idea. This isn't a setting category of dialog box, but more of a confirmation/selection/entry dialog where users will save whatever is entered and chosen. There's a good chance with tabs that users would miss the tabs and miss entering information. And if something on a "back" tab is required and a user doesn't go there, then you have a really poor error experience.
One of the things about scrolling is that it is easy for users with mice. they have the option of either clicking on the scrollbar or (for many) rolling a scroll wheel.
One thing you may not have considered, especially if some things that users can enter or choose are optional, is to create sections within the dialog box that can be collapsed and expanded. Sections with required elements would be expanded by default and sections with optional elements would be collapsed by default. If expansion of a section adds a scrollbar, that addition to the UI is obvious to users.
Of course, you may have to figure out how all this would work for people who have only keyboards, who have disabilities, and who might be accessing this on a mobile device.
I don’t think a tabbed panel is fundamentally better or worse than a scrolling panel. Each has advantages in different situations. However more important in your case is this: If you need tabs or scrolling then your panel is probably too complex to be modal. The more information input in a modal panel, the more likely a user will need to go somewhere else to get an answer, and the more work you throw away if the user decides they must go somewhere else for any reason.
The solution is to move as much information as you can out of the panel and onto the parent page/window. Let users enter the “additional information” right onto the search results page, allowing them to explore the results to help them decide on the information. Since the additional information apparently consumes a lot of space, make its controls show-able and hide-able, but always preserve user inputs between hides and shows. I think it’s okay to either tabs or scrolling to keep the footprint small. Additional information about a single search result should go in controls next to that search result, rather than in a separate panel.
The modal Save panel should only include a few controls that are instrumental to saving, such as the filename and location, and maybe the file type. If all the information is instrumental to saving, then make the save panel modeless. Who says you can’t?
Putting all the save information on another page is not much better than a modal panel, since that is also effectively modal, in the sense that the users can’t go somewhere else without losing their input. Even if you take steps to preserve users’ inputs to the page if they go to another page, most web-abused users will think they might lose their input, so they won’t try.
I like to display more info on certain keywords in a web page. I don't want to send the visitor to another page and I prefer to show the extra info on top of the current page.
The keywords are in an html list. It's basically a list of features and I want to offer more info about the features. So I have two ideas based on having 'More Info' or '?' hyperlinks.
The user hovers on the link and a popup window shows up with the info and goes away when they hover away.
They click on the link, a popup window with an 'X' shows up and they click on the X to close.
Which one offers a better friendlier user experience?
I like #1 because they don't have to click to open and click to close but the disadvantage is that windows might open inadvertently while they are mousing over the page.
Both are pretty annoying, but if I had to pick the lesser of two evils, I'd go with properly done mouseovers.
You can setup Javascript on the page to handle the accidental mouse over, and instead wait for a few seconds before displaying the popup window.
What would your users expect? Try not to break those expectations.
Maybe try a hallway usability study, grabbing a handful of users as they walk past the office, and just ask them to tell you what they would expect. :)
Asking Stack Overflow is a good idea too, but you won't get the advantage of context, which is very important with usability testing.
As a user myself, I find it annoying when I move a mouse and something pops up unexpectedly. Even with a javascript delay (which is better), I still think it's unexpected that something would pop up when I didn't explicitly click on it.
But, that might vary depending on the context of your application.
Personally, I'd go with the click option. There's a standard Way Things Work on the web which says that hovers are for information about the link itself and what action clicking on it will do ("See more comments", "Click for help", etc.), whereas clicking is what actually performs the action.
If you do decide to go with the hover option, make sure that you code it such that users can select the text in the popup. It's really annoying when you just want to copy some useful information somewhere and the GUI hides it before you can reach it.
Adding to what the others have said, I would also prefer the click option.
The problem I have with the hover option is that, and maybe this is just me, if the hoverable area is on the small side, I have a hard time keeping my mouse still enough to keep hovering. The cursor tends to move off the link in the middle of reading and my nice help text disappears.
People don't expect a pop-up on hover - I'd definitely go with the click.
Edit / addition: think about the website you visit every day - text and pictures are (generally) static, and hovering, at most, changes the colour or add underline to a link, or displays a small menu of clickable links.
When clicking on a link, you expect something to happen - a redirect to another page, a pop-up box with information, a form being submitted, etc.
I'm not saying this is the best way to do things, but it is the way 99% of the web works, and asking users to deal with pop-up boxes on hovers or the like is a good way to turn them away. I know I personally don't read any pages with double-underlined links; it's a good indication that an accidental break in scrolling to read the content might end up with my mouse over a link with an advertisement tied to it.
Having a little graphic beside clickable text, or otherwise denoting that clicking will lead to more information is a great way of providing contextual information without frustrating people. For most of the world, pop-ups without clicking still == advertisements or spyware.
Edit / clarification: I don't mean a pop-up in the new window sense, just a lightbox-style javascript pop-up. Don't take the user away from the page, and give them a very visible button to click to close the pop-up. I guess what I'm saying is that people don't expect something to happen without clicking, especially not if it's going to take up more space on the screen.
As a couple of additional precedents to consider, you might want to consider the functionality of the acronym and abbr HTML tags. Both allow you to provide extra information on a particular piece of text in the page, and both work on the "hover" principle.
Points to ponder:
If items are so dense that everywhere you move the mouse something pops up on hover then do NOT do hover!
Can you make hover show very brief info, and have click show more detail? This may be the best of both worlds if it works for you.
Can you have a dedicated box that displays info when you hover? This may be better than any pop-up. Opinions vary...
In the end it's what works for your app, from your users' point of view.