RNIB's Tech Talk podcast is meant to be one of the primary methods for accessing information relating to technology within the United Kingdom. It has the added benefit of being supported by the leading charity for and of blind people in the UK. So when statements are made which are seriously inaccurate, and which are published, it is important they are challenged. If we don't challenge statements which are misleading and proclaimed by employees within the organisation then there is a danger of such advice being accepted as correct.
In episode 438 of the Tech Talk podcast, an Access Technology trainer at RNIB stated that JAWS scripting should only be used as a last resort so as to support applications. He said so on three separate occasions. He seems to be under the serious misapprehension that applications should be accessible without scripting. For example he says this:
"The problem with scripting um in my view is er scripting is a nice thing to use, if apps are not applicable or accessible or if you can't use an application then a script will be very helpful. But in my view, er, programs should be written the way er that people can use them and if a program is not accessible in my view it would be more important to go er to the er let's say to the producer of the program and tell them OKay, this program I can't use it as a screen-reader user, would be there a way that you can make this program more accessible. Scripting is a nice thing, but it is not in my view the best thing".
He continues on in a similar manner. He goes onto repeat that scripting is not the best solution.
RNIB personnel, I have news for you if you are JAWS users. All the core applications you use have scripts created for them. It is extremely rare that you find an application which is not supported by scripts. If you use quick navigation keys on the web, those are scripts. If you want to browse through your table cells in a Word document, you are using scripts. If you want as a blind person to verify font information or that pertaining to line spacing, you are using scripts. If you want to query column and row titles in Excel, you are using scripts, and so on. To advocate that those using applications are better served if they are not supported by scripts would be laughable if the issue wasn't so serious.
Put simply, predominantly JAWS is made up of functions and scripts. Functions generally cause JAWS to announce information automatically and to perform appropriate actions. Scripts are bound to keystrokes. So, as soon as you start using JAWS, and you press keystrokes relating to screen-reading, you are using scripts.
Take an application such as Word. There are approximately 200 scripts to support Word alone. Does this trainer really think that we get the critical detail that we need by Microsoft sending information automatically to the screen-reader? Of course we don't. If you use Word to any degree, scripts are essential for you and that's why Vispero invest so much time in creating and modifying them. Browser support, and that related to PowerPoint and Excel, are other examples where extremely complex scripting has had to take place.
The reason this trainer was on the podcast was to introduce a segment to take users through JAWS-related features, such as those within its Quick Settings facility. But any option changed within Quick Settings is script manipulation and these items are the very things he is condemning.
But it is Christmas, so lets be forgiving. We'll assume shall we that he is uneducated in terms of how a screen-reader technically works, so we will adopt his suggested approach and assume that an application should be accessible without scripts.
I will give you a typical example of why that approach does not work.
Back in February of this year, significant problems crept into Microsoft Teams. These difficulties meant especially that blind people in work took a serious productivity hit. That undoubtedly has a knock-on effect because Management will want to know why a person is taking longer to accomplish the tasks.
Microsoft have been informed about these problems consistently on a month by month basis. Ten months later, the problems have not been solved. That is why the recommended approach does not work. That is what happens when you rely on development within a core application. That is one reason why people often prefer a scripted solution. That is why there has to come a point where some of us say, "Enough is enough", and a scripted approach has to be applied. Indeed I will go further.
There is a group of us who feel that application developers are giving us far too much in the way of spoken output which again impacts upon productivity. When events are thrown at us, causing the screen-reader to become particularly verbose, it can cause considerable distraction. They do not always give due consideration as to whether the information could be delivered in a more concise form. Scripting gives people the control they need over that output so as to serve varying abilities, and they make an application which could be deemed to be accessible more usable.
In summary, the statements given in this podcast episode are nothing short of farcical. There are very few applications I can think of which could not benefit from scripting of some kind and it is ludicrous for an organisation such as RNIB to be suggesting otherwise.
Oh, and, merry Christmas.