Accessibility: what's in a name?

Can you imagine a future where products will bear a seal with the words "Accessibility independently verified by Accessibility Assurance, Inc." or something similar? I can. Will it be worth the ink it is printed with? Maybe. Will it be fashionable (like "low carb")? Probably.

The problem behind it all is simple: what does it mean for a product to be accessible? The academic world has looked into this for a long time already, and works with concepts like 'Universal Access' and 'Design for All'. It is a very active field, and I have high hopes for it in the future.

But let's look at a more limited view... Accessibility in the context of blind individuals. It seems all too straightforward, and yet, sadly it is not. For one, usability and accessibility are not necessarily the same thing. I've seen applications on MS Windows systems be quite accessible with a screen reader, with the caveat that the use of the screen reader often required the user to reboot their system a few times a day due to stability issues. And then there is the very large collection of products that are accessible, with the caveat that "not all features are accessible". A good example is the typical talking gadget (pedometer, blood pressure monitor, ...) that indeed uses speech to give you information, but the setup of the device is not accessible. And of course, the majority of products that claim to be accessible to the blind (some even claim to be "fully accessible") rarely come with an accessible manual.

So, obviously people have a very different view of what it means to be accessible. And that applies to the community as much as it does to the vendors. If one thought that companies seem to have very differing views on what accessibility means, try polling the community of users. One only has to look at a few example issues to determine what a minefield we're in:

• Street lights at crossing become more and more sophisticated in order to provide near-optimal traffic flows. Unfortunately, that often means that the pedestrian walk sign will not allow crossing until somewhere in the middle of the cycle, after turning traffic has passed. Unless there are no cars waiting to turn, in which case pedestrians can start crossing immediately. The obvious solution to some: audible signs that alert the blind pedestrian when the walk sign indicates one is allowed to cross. However, at least one advocacy group of the blind in the US is strictly opposed to audible signs at crossings. There are known cases of blind pedestrians requesting an audible sign at a crossing that is (in their view) complex, arguing their case at a hearing, only to be faced with an opposition from a blind advocacy group!
• Money... Oh dear, the dreaded topic of accessible money. It probably doesn't seem controversial at all to most non-US readers of this blog because the vast majority of countries around the world actually have accessible currency. People around the world like how their bills and coins are different sizes because it is quite convenient. In the US, all bills are the same size. Oh, and they are overall about the same colour as well (until recently, they really were the same colour). So, in all US bills are not very accessible to anyone. But people cope, since you don't really have a choice not to use money in this day and age. A blind advocacy group made a push towards making money accessible a few years ago, and never got very far. A different advocacy group did the same last year, and got a first victory in court on the subject. Then, almost beyond believe, the first advocacy group put out a press release literally slamming the strive for accessible bills because it would have a negative impact on public opinion in terms of whether blind individuals can handle money. Huh, what - change of heart? I have news for them though: the average foreigner would love US currency to be less confusing.
  
• Law suits have been filed against various companies (past and present) in terms of accessibility of their products, especially in the information technology field. And again, advocacy groups have not agreed much on what stand to take. Some are very aggressive in their position, others simply ignore the situation.

One thing is certain: everyone has an opinion and often those opinions do not agree on everything. That's how the world works. It only becomes quite amazing (to me) when disagreements turn into direct opposition. Spending so much of my time on working on accessibility solutions in information technology, I sometimes really have to wonder why I bother. After all... some group might decide that my work has an negative impact on public opinion, implying that blind users have trouble using computer systems.