Web developer, writer, speaker. Co-founder of his company Algonquin Studios as well as evolt.org. Has co-written “Usability: The Site Speaks for Itself,” “Web Graphics for Non-Designers,” and “Web Professional's Handbook.”
Alt_Text_Bot uses an API from CloudSight to help describe images submitted in tweets. Users simply need to mention @alt_text_bot in a tweet with an image (the tweet must be part of the image, not in a Twitter card or via a link) and Alt Text Bot will respond with a description.
It has some limitations. The biggest is the character limit within Twitter. Converting a chart to text, for example, is a great idea, but the character limit of Twitter precludes you from getting much value and descriptions can be truncated.
Another is probably from the CloudSight API. If an image is tweeted twice (such as a retweet), you might get two different descriptions (as this first one demonstrates, and then this second one). On top of this, not all images are very clear and context is hard to convey, as in this one showing wheelchair demonstrators in Seoul.
Regardless, given the current state of accessible images on Twitter, this tool is awesome. As I write this I see more and more people testing Alt Text Bot, so I expect that, even if this is just a proof of concept, more good things will come as a result.
The next image is me being excited about this, along with both descriptions that Alt Text Bot provided.
Yesterday I presented a stripped-down version of my Selfish Accessibility talk at Buffalo Unconference. With an unknown audience and a 20 minute timeline, I gutted most of the technical bits and focused on my thesis. I think it was well received.
At the end of the talk, I pointed people to the version of this talk I gave for Avega Group last month in Stockholm, as it has (many more) slides (with more detail) and video of me rambling. That longer talk is a bit of a disservice to those who don't want to hear me drone on for an hour and a half as well for those who aren't technical.
With that, here are the slides from yesterday in all their concise glory.
The conference produced just one tweet to satisfy my ego:
Now that feature has been formalized. Users should see it when retweeting a tweet as the option to quote a tweet (which previously would just wrap the original tweet in quotes).
This can be a boon to Twitter image accessibility, allowing alternative text to wrap an image tweet (see my post on existing techniques). Except for a few points:
Twitter's (current*) prohibition on retweeting oneself means that users cannot easily quote their own tweets to add alternative text — at least not in the Android app nor on the web. TweetDeck allows it, so perhaps we'll see it in the app or web site.
Because a quoted tweet is not a reply, it doesn't show up in the list of replies when viewing the original image tweet. This means a missed opportunity to be associated with the alternative text when viewed on its own.
When viewing the tweet providing the alternative text (as a standalone tweet, not in the timeline) in the Android app, the image within the quoted tweet is not displayed.
Embedding a tweet that acts as alternative text doesn't show the original quoted tweet (nor its image). There isn't an option to embed media, so web page authors will likely embed the original image tweet instead of the alternative text tweet. You can see this example below.
Twitter is missing an opportunity to provide an interface that prompts users to provide alternative text. This might help stem the inconsistent efforts from those who want to provide accessibility (such as 18F's noble but under-informed efforts).
The first image shows a tweet quoting an image tweet when viewed in the timeline (the quoted tweet's content is visible). The second image shows a tweet quoting another when viewed on its own, demonstrating that the quoted tweet's content isn't displayed at all. Note in both views that I cannot retweet my own tweet (the option is disabled).
Cannot easily use new @Twitter tweet quoting on web nor app. Doing this via TweetDeck.
(alt:CSUN cert of attendance) https://t.co/Onn99uUIfg
Screen shot of a web page as seen in the Twitter app, with a menu showing the option to open in the user's default web browser.
The title of this post may be a bit of hyperbole for some, but it is completely true for me.
Sometime over the course of the last week Twitter changed what happens when I tap links in the native Twitter app on Android. Links now open within an embedded browser, not in my default browser.
I have Chrome 40 installed on my Android phone. The built-in web view on my phone is 10 releases back, at Chrome 30. Normally this isn't a concern of mine, but when a good deal of my Twitter timeline consists of bleeding edge web development techniques, I want to view those on a current release of Chrome.
The first image shows that the user agent string within the Twitter app includes Chrome 30. The second image shows my default browser user agent string is Chrome 40.
This change appeared while I was traveling internationally, which means I had a slower connection than usual as well as a data cap. Not only do I have to view content in an old browser, I have to know that the web view is older so that I then know to open it in my default browser.
That's at least two more taps, plus the burden of the download starting in the web view that I don't want. That extra download burden also impacts my data cap, which is an even bigger issue if I have chosen to surf with Opera Mini to make the most of my limited data cap (you know, data budgeting).
Not only did I never enable this feature, I cannot disable it. It appeared three weeks after my last Twitter app update (see the caption below).
The first image shows the settings screen in the Android Twitter app, version 5.48.0. You can see there is no option to disable the in-app browser, though it has been enabled. The second image is the note in the Google Play store that tells me the only change in the new release is updated profiles so it's easier to view bios, Tweets and photos. The final image shows the option to disable the in-app browser, but only because I updated to version 5.51.0 (when I returned from home and shed my data cap).
So What?
A couple months ago Peter-Paul Koch wrote about the massive fragmentation in the world of Chrome (Chrome continues to fall apart at brisk pace), something to which Twitter is now contributing en masse.
In the modern world of rapidly updating browsers, 10 releases may not seem like a big deal. I guess it comes down to what you want to see, or more importantly, what you want your users to see. Can I Use provides a quick way to compare Chrome 30 and Chrome 40 to see which features you may be missing. Here's a short list:
The ability to discard many -webkit- prefixes,
Font unicode-range subsetting,
matches() DOM method,
CSS touch-action property,
CSS Font Loading,
Custom Elements,
picture element,
Web Cryptography,
WOFF 2.0 - Web Open Font Format.
If you rely on any of these (or many other) features of the open web platform, and you receive traffic from Twitter, I suggest you monitor your logs to see if the most common version of Chrome drops.
As for user experience, If you plan to allow users to toggle a new "feature," don't push that feature to them without the toggle. Especially when you exclude it from your update notes within the app store.
In addition to the slides, I've embedded video of my talk and way too many tweets after that.
Video
Impressing everyone on the internet, Paul Klipp has already gotten videos from ACE! posted less than 24 hours after the event ended. That's impressive. I understand his tactic is to upload lower resolution videos immediately and then slowly replace them with higher resolution videos. Depending on when you see this, it may still be the low-res video.
Tweets
Tweets from ACE! that satisfy my ego, show me in a photo, or might be funny.
I've received the audience feedback from my talk and overall was pleased. 17 people responded (out of what I estimate was ~40+ in the room) with the following rankings:
Loved it! 10
Liked it: 2
Meh: 4
Didn't like it: 0
Hated it! 1
Of those 17, 10 left comments (which I greatly appreciate!). Sadly, the one Hate it vote did not leave any comments.
Liked it: Too basic for me, but nice examples of disabilities.
Loved it! I loved the idea how to easily test your apps.
Loved it! Great that this topic emerged.
Loved it! Great approach to creating sites/apps friendly for impaired.
Loved it! Full of very practical suggestions. Thanks for including it.
Loved it! Content that usually doesn't get a forum.
Meh: Interesting, however I won't get a chance to use what I learned.
Loved it! Interesting point of view. I did not consider accessibility during software design. I should start.
Liked it: Most important is to think about problem, not about product/project.
Meh: Nicely said, but too short.
The two Meh comments are mostly out of my control. I was given a 30 minute slot, which I agree is too short for all that can be said on the topic. As for the commenter who claims he/she won't be able to use it, I feel that the testing parts of my talk at the very least are in everyone's reach, so I think it comes down to deciding to use it. Even if only to troll the Virgin America site.
Both typefaces claim that heavier strokes on the bottom prevent dyslexic readers from flipping the letters when viewing them. The original caption: A heavier bottom is used to show which way is supposed to be down.
I've been writing this post in fits, so it may be a bit disjointed. I started it on my flight home from CSUN, and continued to work on it on subsequent flights. Apologies if it's a bit chaotic.
TL;DR: Typefaces designed to help dyslexics have no effect.
I'll list information about the two typefaces that I am aware of (which are designed explicitly for readers with dyslexia), as well as notes from the talk at CSUN and a couple other examples.
Typefaces
I am aware of two typefaces that are designed with dyslexic readers in mind.
OpenDyslexic
Open Dyslexic is an open source typeface for readers with dyslexia. The rationale behind the design:
OpenDyslexic is created to help with some of the symptoms of dyslexia. Letters have heavy weighted bottoms to indicate direction. You are able to quickly figure out which part of the letter is down which aids in recognizing the correct letter, and sometimes helps to keep your brain from rotating them around. Consistently weighted bottoms can also help reinforce the line of text. The unique shapes of each letter can help prevent confusion through flipping and swapping.
Dyslexie
Dyslexie is a paid typeface (free for home use). The site references research that supports the following claim:
Representative research among many dyslectics has shown that the font Dyslexie actually helps them with reading texts faster and with fewer errors.
I would like to note that copying that text directly from the browser wasn't easy. The use of Cufon to embed the typeface drops each word into its own element that itself hides and replaces the raw text in a canvas element. I'm sure you can imagine how much that offends me.
The following video explains the idea behind the typeface:
Study: Can a font improve reading?
The latest study to suggest that typefaces designed to aid reading for dyslexics had little to no effect was presented at CSUN this past week. As I noted on Twitter, I already had an idea what the results would be, and I came away feeling validated.
The study hasn't been pubished yet and I saw its first general presentation. The study was conducted at Mount Allison University, a 2,500 student college with 215 full-time students with disabilities. 50% of those students are classified as having a learning disability.
The questions asked by the study:
Do the style of the letters on a page mean that you read faster and make fewer errors?
Do persons with LD [learning disabilities] using this font read faster and make fewer errors?
The typefaces (Open Dyslexic and Dyslexie) make claims about their benefits, aggregated in the presentation as:
Students with surface dyslexia experience letters flipping and moving around; Letters needed to be bottom heavy to prevent them from moving around
New font would increase reading speed
Will also increase accuracy (fewer errors)
Will decrease reading stress
Widely promoted to on-line uses and in word processing (Instapaper, iPad, an app)
Strong anecdotal feedback
The presenter outlined some literature references, the procedure the team followed to perform the study, the nature of the participants (and control group), and the overall results.
The first bullet in the summary wraps it up nicely:
The font does NOT improve reading speed or accuracy for students with LD.
An interesting note from the study was that half of each group (50% of control, 57% of LD group) said they would consider using the font and were then shown how to access it (download and install it, which I assume was Open Dyslexic). In a follow-up, none of those participants were using the font.
Another interesting point was that 40% of the control group and 48% of the LD group thought they performed better when using Open Dyslexic, though that was not the case.
As anyone who's done user testing knows, it's not uncommon for users to report one thing while doing or thinking another, so I consider this to be anecdotal reinforcement that the typeface had no benefit for users.
Study: Good Fonts for Dyslexia: An Experimental Study
In late 2013 I found a write-up on a Spanish study that reviewed which fonts were easiest for readers with dyslexia. The post summarizes the study:
Based on the evaluation of 48 dyslexic subjects ages 11-50, reading 12 texts with 12 different fonts, they determined that reading performance was best with sans serif, monospaced, and roman fonts used in the study. They also found that reading was significantly impaired when italic fonts were used.
[…]
Use of the OpenDyslexic font did not enhance text readability or reading speed. The study participants strongly preferred Verdana or Helvetica over the OpenDyslexic alternative.
For those of us who build applications and sites with content of any length (whether instructions for shopping carts or rant-laden long-form articles), I have found a few techniques are generally agreed upon by the community (feedback is welcome!):
Avoid justified text.
Use generous line spacing / leading.
Use generous letter spacing.
Avoid italics.
Generally use sans serif faces.
Use larger text.
Use good contrast.
Use clear, concise writing.
This generally follows rules for good typography.
You may have heard that Comic Sans is easier for readers with dyslexia to understand, but so far that evidence appears to be anecdotal. Certainly not enough to warrant punishing all your other users.
If you read an article that suggests users with dyslexia see letters flip or rotate, then be wary. Not only was this assertion challenged by participants in the study reported at CSUN, but generally the participant reaction was anger. The flipping/rotating may be a myth perpetuated by those without dyslexia in an effort to make sense of its effects.
Update: March 26, 2015
In a post from 2011 (Dyslexia, Fonts & Open Source), Mike Gifford outlines some of the issues related to supporting readers with dyslexia, including typefaces.
