大象传媒

B.B.C. 鈥� BACKSTAGE PODCAST
Matthew Cashmore
Gareth Ford-Williams
Julie Howell
Andy Budd
Jonathan Chetwynd
Kath Moonan
Nick Holmes
Ian Forrester

MATT [00:00:09] Hello and welcome to the backstage.bbc.co.uk podcast. Today we鈥檙e talking about accessibility in the web2.0 world and we鈥檙e joined by a panel of seven people. Those people are: Gareth Ford-Williams who is the accessibility team lead from the 大象传媒; Julie Howell from Fortune Cookie; Andy Budd from Clearleft; Jonathan Chetwynd from eas-i.co.uk; (spells) Kath Moonan from AbilityNet and Nick Holmes, Technical Manager for Client-Side Developer at the 大象传媒. And today I鈥檓 handing over the chairing baton to Mr Ian Forrester so Ian, it鈥檚 over to you.

IAN [00:00:47] Thank you very much Matthew. So how this started was we got talking, me and Katherine, about social networks and accessibility. And so Katherine, can you enlighten us with the kind of.. the overview of your project that you're working on, ability net.

KAT H [00:01:07] Sure. For the past three months or so we鈥檝e been talking to both users with disabilities who are part of our testing team at AbilityNet and industry experts about really where the state of play was about whether people with disabilities were actually managing to use social networking websites and whether they wanted to. What people reported back to us in the research is that users really want to use the websites and there鈥檚 a huge audience out there of people who just can鈥檛 use sites like MySpace and FaceBook because they鈥檙e simply not able to because the sites aren鈥檛 accessible.

[00:01:54] There鈥檚 lots of reasons why people with disabilities as a group might specifically want to use social networking websites. For example, if you鈥檝e got a vision impairment and you go to a conference: a) you don鈥檛 know what the speaker looks like and b) it might be really difficult to make that face to face content... contact where you can kind of go and discuss something that you're interested in. But if you have a social networking site you can catch up with them at a later date and do the networking in a different way. But... so this is one of the many reasons why these tools should be accessible. When we talked to users, what we found was really interesting because a lot of the time, when people start talking about web2 they immediately start talking about Ajax and the technical aspects of accessibility, which are really important, but what was really interesting about the research is that we found that users couldn't even get that far because of 鈥榗apture files鈥� and capture files without an audio description are difficult for not only users with a vision impairment, as you might expect, but also users with dyslexia, users with learning disabilities. So there鈥檚 a whole group of people who just couldn't get past the first hurdle.

[00:03:18] After that we talked to a couple of users who鈥檝e managed to use the networks and some are better than others. For example, with FaceBook there is an alternative to the capture if you've got a voice enabled mobile which is great if you have, but not so great if you haven鈥檛. Sights like MySpace, we talked to Chris McCausland who鈥檚 a comedian who鈥檇 managed to set up a profile on MySpace by getting a friend to help him. But when you actually get into the network there鈥檚 a number of key functions that don鈥檛 work, so for example, Chris wasn鈥檛 able to choose who is best friend is, and his best friend is still Tom who is always the first friend of everyone by default on MySpace. So even if you manage to get through to that first barrier there鈥檚 still a myriad of issues. And then the other one is user generated content on how you make... users make sites accessible or content.

IAN [00:04:19] Just kind of flies in the face of the participation of the.. yeah, Web2.0 and everyone can kind of take place and ah... Julie, does this sound like we haven鈥檛 really moved forward since the days of like 1997 where we were really banging the drum about accessibility and getting developers to at least consider this and do things right. It seems like we鈥檝e kind of forgotten some of the lessons.

JULIE [00:04:46] I don鈥檛 think we have forgotten the lessons, and if we.. as the web development community, profession, I think web developers do remember the users. I鈥檝e moved from working at the Royal National Institute for the Blind for 12 years where I worked very closely with disabled people to now working at a web development agency and working with the clients. And when I worked at RNIB 鈥� and I was working with disabled people all the time, encouraging disabled people to let us know when they found websites that they couldn't use. Since I鈥檝e moved across that doesn鈥檛 seem to be happening anymore and I鈥檓 scratching my head about why this is. You know the technology has moved on but so has web developers鈥� grasp of the accessibility issues I feel. I think what鈥檚 a bit missing at the moment is enough disabled people banging their fist on the table and saying: this isn鈥檛 good enough!

[00:05:33] I鈥檓 very encouraged by the work that Kathy is doing at AbilityNet to solicit opinion from disabled people, but I wish that disabled people would be more vocal in complaining that the web鈥檚 not good enough, you know. I think it鈥檚 very easy to say well, you know, I鈥檒l do my best with what I鈥檝e got, but disabled people out there, clearly don鈥檛 feel that way, you know, you have got a right to use the web and to use social networks and assert that right. Complain, talk to Kath at AbilityNet, talk to the companies that run these social networks and make your voice heard. I think it鈥檚 that that鈥檚 slipped backwards, Ian, I don鈥檛 think it鈥檚 the knowledge of developers, I think it鈥檚 where鈥檚 the disabled people's voice saying: We want this and we want it right now and we have a right of access to it.

IAN [00:06:21] And so Jonathan, actually, with your project that you're working on, could you describe how that works and why you chose some of the technologies that you have?

JONATHAN [00:06:31] Yes, I ran for two years from 2002, 2004 for Lambeth College and Wandsworth Social Services for Wandsworth Borough Council. A web portal which had existed since about 1998 called pepo.co.uk and originally it had been pepo.com and it used gifts for people with very low literacy and learning disabilities, and we moved towards SVG and CSS and RDF because they provide better quality images that are easier to find, and I have to agree very strongly with Julie鈥檚 feeling, but more recently I鈥檝e moved more towards people with low literacy which is a much bigger community. There鈥檚 I suppose about one in five people in the UK are functionally illiterate, something like 7 million people of working age, and they鈥檙e currently excluded and again I talked to CETIS earlier in the year regarding their... putting the user at half the W3PC process because I feel that the corporates have been managing the specifications 鈥� not intentionally to their own benefits but that is the natural outcome because users are not involved in the process, who is providing the... ah.. the checks and balances to the specifications, where the ordinary users, the people with very low literacy, or just average literacy, but not... the non-technical people, the people who aren鈥檛 web designers, how are they feeding in to the development of specifications because the technology.. it鈥檚 no wonder the technologies aren鈥檛 appropriate if they鈥檙e not designed by people.. the ordinary person, and it鈥檚...

IAN [00:08:43] Sorry, I guess that鈥檚 where the key difference is with ?? areas, that people, the users, the audience, can actually build their own stuff. They don鈥檛 have to learn ??, they can just pop into wordpress.com whatever and away they go. Andy, can I ask you a question about... there鈥檚 been a little bit of talk about the W3C and the kind of standards and whatnot. Now I was wondering from a professional point of view, do you kind of look at the specs, do you review the specs, do you get involved in that or.. or is it just kind of.. do you feel that it鈥檚 kind of.. there鈥檚 a kind of.. when you look at the specs your kind of eyes kind of blaze over and...

ANDY [00:09:30] Yes, I think what鈥檚 going on with W3C at the moment is very interesting. W3C is largely a member organisation, people pay to join. There are a lot of kind of universities and not-for-profit members but also a lot of companies like Microsoft and Adobe that do have a vested interest to a certain extent in the outcomes of how these specifications are shaped. And quite often it鈥檚 easier to fight battles within the kind of the working groups, the W3C, and stop specifications from being created, than it is to take them outside and enforce copyright let鈥檚 say through legal channels or talk to other browser vendors or other kind of companies to try and get some kind of consensus, so a lot of battles which shouldn't really be happening within the W3C working groups are happening within the working groups.

[00:10:25] I think a very interesting example is what鈥檚 going on with web2.0. It seems to be that a lot of the battles are starting to get solved and people are making headway but it just seems to be mired in sort of a controversy with various companies trying to not have their applications which they sell and their (CEO?) message which they sell, be classed as inaccessible, and so the whole kind of baseline thing came about, and I think it鈥檚 very interesting. I think Jonathan is also absolutely right. There isn鈥檛 enough engagement outside of the W3C working groups. I know the web development community is getting very frustrated about the progress of certain specifications like CSS3 because we don鈥檛 feel that our voices are being listened to and we feel that the people that are creating the specifications are somewhat outside of the development community and of the user community, they tend to be like as I say, from big companies and from academic institutions. So I think there鈥檚 a lot of dissatisfaction at the moment with how the W3C works.

IAN [00:11:25] Before we go to ?? two and ?? three, I wanted to talk to Nick Holmes. So Nick, as one of the kind of the main people behind the standards in 大象传媒, I was wondering, has there been much update in the standards? Sorry, also Gareth as well, you know, have there been video updates in the standards and what鈥檚 kind of planned for the future?

NICK [00:11:54] Well I could start ?? this slightly by saying we do have a new version, particularly in.. well just actually in Gareth鈥檚 areas, around accessibility, that we have just about to launch, I鈥檓 not quite sure why it hasn鈥檛 launched but...

IAN There鈥檚 a question around one particular ?? that needs clearing and that鈥檚 it, no clarification. Yeah. Sorry, so the question was...

NICK [00:12:22] I guess progression?

IAN Yes.

NICK We have had a bit of a slow summer for various internal reasons, but we are still.. you know.. obviously very interested in driving that forward. We do have ??, as I say, about to come out. Yeah, I mean, as Andy was saying, it鈥檚 quite frustrating the distance between new standards coming on, the W3C and where we are and there鈥檚 a lot.. there鈥檚 kind of...

GARETH [00:12:55] Sorry, I think the thing with the W3C is they鈥檙e not standards, they鈥檙e guidelines, and I think one of the problems that a lot of people have been facing is the W3C have been trying to create legislation. They understand that these guidelines are going to be used in court to... to settle accessibility disputes. So they鈥檝e been trying to make it more like legislation but the fundamental fact is that these are guidelines. Accessibility isn鈥檛 an on off switch. You can鈥檛 say that a site is either accessible or inaccessible. So turning these guidelines into legislation is not going to happen, and it鈥檚 really unfair that you can.. you know, you can get into a situation where you create a site which is accessible to the audience that you have. But strictly speaking, you're not meeting... you know, double A conformance.

NICK? [00:13:38] I think this is where their agenda has kind of changed as an organisation because really when they wrote (WikAct1?) it was more as a guideline for other people to go and write their own standards. Unfortunately people just took them lock stock and barrel and said.. you know, this is the way it should be. And the way our approach is, we have a look at organisations like W3C, we look at Wasp, etc. We have a look at their standards and then we put them in context of what we do as an organisation and say where is this relevant to our output as a broadcaster. And then you have context. It鈥檚 immediate that you can sit down and send... and in context of the disability discrimination act, and with us we put context as our 大象传媒 values, there are six values which are on the back of all our ID cards which lots of people read and understand and it鈥檚... and four of them are exactly about this, and one of them is audiences are at the heart of everything we do.

[00:14:35] We take pride in delivering quality and value for money, and quality to me is... accessibility is a measure of quality. Creativity is the life blood of our organisation and that鈥檚 something around the fact that everyone has the opportunity to be creative and to use generated content etc, because now the 大象传媒 is moving into this Web2.0 鈥� I always have real difficulties with that title anyway (laugh) but the 大象传媒 wants to be not just on the web, it wants to be part of the web. So user generated content is part of what we鈥檙e going to have to engage with, and we respect each other and celebrate our diversity, so that everyone can give their best, and to me I think.. you know, these four things are what to me is accessibility from a 大象传媒 point of view is all about. We sort of.. in our standards development, if you have an extremely boring evening and want to fill it with reading 大象传媒 standards then please go ahead but they鈥檙e on .co.uk but what we鈥檝e done all the way through that is look at exactly everything that we want to achieve as an organisation and said how can we get this to everybody because the British public pay for us.

NICK? [00:15:47] I actually know a lot of web developers that will point their clients to the 大象传媒鈥檚 accessibility pages to give their clients an idea of a well written accessibility policy, so I think that鈥檚... I think you've been doing a good job so far.

IAN Thank you. Julie.

JULIE [00:16:04] Just to pick up on something that Andy said earlier, I think it shouldn't be lost in all of this. There are clearly a lot of difficulties with translating what ?? ?? web accessibility initiative does kind of ?? close doors in a way into affecting no positive change in the real world, and I think one of the difficulties that they come up against at W3C is their own process, their own way of doing things, and it just seems to be... this eternal cycle of producing something that never actually really materialises. But some body else who鈥檚 not around this table, who is a big voice in the accessibility world has said something recently that I think is very valuable and that鈥檚 that in fact now we鈥檙e in a post guideline era and.. you know, as Andy has said, and I鈥檇 like to follow on from that, we need to move from it all being about guidelines to actually it being about a process where you're considering who your audience is and how you best meet their needs, and also thinking not so much of guidelines but of standards.

[00:17:03] So rather than think about checking the box for each individual point, thinking about a basis from which you operate, and certainly in the UK this is where we鈥檝e started to take this approach, through work with the British Standards guys producing something called a publicly available specification which considers the process one goes through to arrive at web consent that the maximum audience can use rather than focusing in on ticking the box because quite often what you find is, if you can tick the boxes great, but do you actually help anybody who鈥檚 disabled?

IAN [00:17:37] I think that鈥檚 exactly the point, isn鈥檛 it, that there鈥檚 examples already where people have made a site completely accessible but completely unusable which is interesting for.. Katherine, sorry?

KATH [00:17:50] Just to underline that, Ian, we were recently involved in disabled user testing a large website for a well-known organisation who鈥檇 really, really thought hard about accessibility, and if you test it to the WCAG guidelines you'd be pressed to find anything that it had an issue with, and we sat users in front of it, got them to do key tasks and most of the key tasks were failed by most of the users and it was because of issues that fell outside of what is a normal understanding of guidelines because the guidelines just can鈥檛 cover anything. I think one of the problems at the moment, well WCAG had too ?? in draft is that we work with organisations a lot who... and lots of web developers who work for larger organisations who鈥檒l know that people want a standard, they want a badge, they want something to go to people who don鈥檛 understand the issues and say yes, this has been done, and this is where there鈥檚 a problem in that.. in the absence of writing your own standards there isn鈥檛 anything there that you can... well there is other standards but most people recognise the WCAG, whereas we would try and point them to paths which just references WCAG.

IAN [00:19:11] Actually this is a very good point, we鈥檝e already talked about WCAG, what is WCAG ??, and what鈥檚 ??. I know Julie you are our very involved in this so you might be the best person to explain.

JULIE [00:19:24] That鈥檚 right, it鈥檚 probably most sensible if I start with a little bit of the history. So we鈥檙e very concerned in the UK those of us in the accessibility movement as I call it, and the Disability Rights Commission as was, that the accessibility guidelines published by the Web Accessibility Initiative have been around for a few years, and yet we were hearing that many websites were very difficult for disabled people to use, and the DRC 鈥� Disability Rights Commission 鈥� did some research and found that this was indeed the case. Many developers argued that they were trying to follow the guidelines and couldn't really understand why none of the websites they were producing were actually useable by disabled people.

[00:20:02] So a couple of years ago in 2005 the Disability Rights Commission and the Blue Standards Institution and myself got together to produce some new guidance that is actually guidance on how to arrive at a process for producing an accessible website, so that includes the web content access ability guidelines from the Web Accessibility Initiative, but it also includes as an essential aspect involvement of disabled people in user testing, and also involvement of disabled people right from the beginning to decide what the site is for and how they鈥檙e going to access it because there鈥檚 so much multimedia now, there鈥檚 so many different ways to deliver a service, and also a new idea of producing accessibility policy for internal use within a company to decide and define this is how our disabled customers are going to access our services and content online, and then an accessibility statement that goes onto the website but talks directly to disabled people about what they can expect, or expect to find difficult when they might use the site, and I feel that where we are now in the UK, this idea of approaching accessibility as a process rather than a tick in the box is more likely to result in a better user experience for disabled people, and indeed that鈥檚 what I have found with the clients that I鈥檝e worked with at Fortune Cookie.

ANDY? [00:21:29] I absolutely and utterly agree with this. I think box ticking is not what it is about. I mean each time we have a project, we sit down and look at it, and obviously we put together sort of requirements around the project and always there are accessibility requirements, but what we always look on an individual project is what is the editorial objective and how do we get everyone to it. It鈥檚 not always the same route, but you鈥檝e got to give everyone an equivalent experience, and this is where I鈥檓 going key Nick in about some work we鈥檙e doing at the moment on web principles and equivalence is what it鈥檚 about, equivalence with a 鈥榗e鈥� on the end, not giving someone a different experience and a different thing but... Nick?

NICK [00:22:18] Yeah, I mean I probably should have prepared a bit more for this but yeah, one of my team has been working up kind of web principles around accessibility. He would say it all comes down to equivalence in a sense, but it鈥檚 about kind of separating out what you're trying to achieve with your audience and working from that as a base, separating out what you're trying to say from how you're trying to say it I suppose. I鈥檓 not explaining this wonderfully well. But things... I mean in terms of going down to technical levels, or not so technical levels, subjects of progress enhancement, starting with the basic message you're trying to convey and embellishing that in various ways, potentially towards a certain audience but actually starting from something that鈥檚 quite supposedly universally accessible.

KATH [00:23:20] I think one of the issues at the moment with the whole who delayed and delayed the new set of guidelines WCAG 2 has been is that in that in that small time frame, the web has actually shifted again absolutely enormously into what we can or can鈥檛 call web2.0 and we鈥檝e kind of reached a stage where we鈥檙e still discussing a stage of guidelines that haven鈥檛 been released yet, and while that was being focused on, what we鈥檙e actually talking about, the products are changing, even though there鈥檚 the webarea out there which is the road map to look at internet applications and their accessibility, that鈥檚 mainly a technical document and I know from the research that I鈥檝e done that it isn鈥檛 just the technical issues around languages like Ajax and their interaction with assisted technologies like screen readers that creates the problem. There鈥檚 a myriad of problems. For example I was discussing YouTube with a screen reader user and the user didn鈥檛 know that you could control playback because the interface was completely inaccessible and there鈥檚 no help. So an example like that is how do we kind of get disabled users to start engaging with web2 applications and how do we get developers to think about the issues when there isn鈥檛 yet... the standard is way behind what people are actually doing are in development.

IAN [00:25:01] But surely this is one of the things that came up in Jeremy Keith鈥檚 article is why would... some people would say, why would a blind person want to look at YouTube, you know, and I guess that鈥檚 the kind of... sort of ignorance that we鈥檙e dealing with. Do we have to deal with that before we even touch on that.

ANDY [00:25:24] Can I just say that Jeremy wasn鈥檛 being ignorant in the article, he was posing a question but it sounded like... it sounded a little bit like it came across saying he was suggesting that from his own mouth, he was countering those arguments. I think we are in a very interesting state at the moment because we are in a state of flux, and the web is changing from a page base approach to more of an application base approach and I think a lot of developers at the moment are.. have got a load of new toys, and they鈥檙e playing with the new toys and not necessarily in a way that promotes accessibility, and I do think that when... you know, give it a bit of time and things will settle down. People will understand how to use the technology a little bit better and start focusing more again on accessibility. There are some techniques, the idea of progressive enhancement as you mentioned, allowing people to separate content from presentation from behaviour, it鈥檚 very, very important. This is much more about universities I think rather than about accessibility, I think there鈥檚 a difference. I probably don鈥檛 have enough time to discuss that here. But I think there is.. I think there are also issues with screen reader and manufacturers. I think the problem at the moment with progressive enhancement isn鈥檛 whether your site works with JavaScript on or off.

[00:26:40] You know, if it were just the case that screen reader didn鈥檛 understand JavaScript and everyone using progressive enhancement it would be fantastic because they would get a version of the content which they can understand. The problem is that a lot of screen readers do this kind of half-hearted sort of partial understanding and particularly when you're looking at things like Ajax when it鈥檚 updating various elements of the page, areas of the page. There are screen readers which don鈥檛 actually realise that the DOM has changed and don鈥檛 realise that new information has come in. So it鈥檚 all very well I see this a lot, sort of people talking about accessibility and focusing on the developer, but I do think it is also the job of the screen readers to... manufacturers to keep up on technology and provide us with the tools that we need to make the sites more accessible.

JONATHAN? [00:27:24] I think you're absolutely right and I think if you take the standpoint that the web is broken to start off with, you've got to look at it, it鈥檚 not an issue, accessibility isn鈥檛 a Standards and Guidelines issue. It鈥檚 a combination of approach, understanding, it鈥檚 a combination, also it brings in what.. you know, assisted tech generally is broken, it鈥檚 all in development, it鈥檚 trying to keep up with what the web is doing, and things are all out of sync, it depends on what the content providers are providing. Is the content multimodal? Does the AV have subtitles? Is the subtitles presented as a text file or is it embedded? Is there audio description? So there鈥檚 a multimodality issue that comes from content and that鈥檚 not necessarily a developers issue. Is there... you know, what鈥檚 going on with the browsers?

[00:28:10] You know, browsers will treat web pages in different ways and assisted tech works with the browsers in different ways and the whole thing is quite.. you know, it鈥檚 amazing how it all works and holds together, and I think this is where.. I know we can talk about universality till the cows come home and I think that, to me, accessibility is part of that because it鈥檚 about the multimodality of content, how many different ways can it be delivered, how separate it is in the way it delivers that, and it then in some ways the way that you build things so it鈥檚 all not sort of hard-coded and glued together, that gives users choice, and it gives users choice to use different browsers, different assisted technologies, different platforms to get into the content, and I think there鈥檚 a strange balance that goes on that we鈥檙e trying to fix as developers and as content providers but it鈥檚 a much bigger problem.

JULIE [00:29:08] Kath said something that really resonated with me actually about how to get disabled people to engage with web.2 and I think.. you know, you said something very profound there Kath because I believe that even if the web was fully accessible, disabled people may well still struggle because who鈥檚 role is it to explain to disabled people how the web works and to help disabled people build confidence with using these new technologies, you know. I really resent the kind of the implication that鈥檚 often put to me that disabled people who use the web must also be experts in coding and experts in how access technology works and quite simply they are not, and particularly people who鈥檝e acquired an impairment as they鈥檝e become older and haven鈥檛 used this tech all of their lives and we all know around the table there鈥檚 such a difference between a novice access technology user and an experienced one, and that鈥檚 an issue that somebody needs to take responsibility for as well.

[00:30:02] With the question of how do we get people to engage with web2.0 it鈥檚 very important to remember that web developers on the whole are commissioned by companies and website commissioners, website owners, and in my experience of working closer with them now, they will do whatever they need to to make business and to make money, and I have found a great deal of value in linking accessibility with this idea of conversion that where you make a website accessible, useable to the largest number of people, more people are likely to use the website, not just to browse but also to buy, and that鈥檚 what companies want, and if you say to a company and you can prove it to a company that.. you know, if you do this, they will come, disabled people will come. And you reach out to disabled people and say look, you know, there鈥檚 this thing... we did it with Tesco, my goodness, in droves and droves and droves of people. Because we worked with Tesco when I was at RNIB to make that more accessible and then told disabled people about it, suddenly millions more pounds are going through the virtual tills at Tesco. We need to create more of that so it鈥檚 not just the developers, it鈥檚 also the website owners and disabled people all being brought to the table together.

JONATHAN? [00:31:24] So my concern is that for quite a while now that conversation has been around content providers and to me web2.0 is about altering resources and involving the majority that the population in the altering and my concern is that the whole process that we鈥檝e been discussing, not just accessibility but how the technologies are created, the specifications of the individual but HTML CSS SVG RDF the creation of a specification is all based around the educational philosophy of filling a jug, it鈥檚 the top down companies providing resources for the population whereas if we鈥檙e going to move to a true web2.0 we need to be developing technologies that inspire and spark the light in each individual that encourages them to go out and create, and that isn鈥檛 going to come out of the top down filling the jug type of process which is the one that we鈥檙e stuck in at the moment.

KATH [00:32:29] I think that one of the positive examples of our disabled community is picked up on social networking is that Bebo is huge with the deaf community because you can upload video. So really for the first time ever people have been able to share not on a one to one basis but on a one to many, sign material instantaneously. So that鈥檚 one example of how a developer of a web2 product probably Bebo weren鈥檛 even thinking about that but I hope that they pay attention to it now. If you do think about the different ways that people can use multimedia and different ways of accessing different information, can open up a whole new audience, what resoundingly came back to me during the research is that people really, really want to use the technology and that鈥檚 the underlying thing.

[00:33:36] I think that any developers out there who are listening I think you could have a killer rat if develop a web2 product that鈥檚 accessible because people want to know what they are. I think there鈥檚 a couple of things leading on from that is that we鈥檝e been thinking at AbilityNet about what we can do to change because Andy鈥檚 right, we鈥檙e in a state of flux at the moment and one of the issues is that traditionally with old 1.5 web development you had a cycle of development and then a grand review. You fixed the things in the grand review and then you put a website live. That model is beginning to disappear with the new practices around web development which aren鈥檛 necessarily technical but you have a process where you develop a bit, you reject it, you develop it a bit, you reject it. So we need to rethink how we assist organisations, how does disabled user testing fit into that model where you're only maybe testing a small module of what you've done, and that鈥檚 one of the things we鈥檙e interested in because developers aren鈥檛 going to stop working in that way so we need to think as people who help out with accessibility how we can fit into that model, and that鈥檚 something that we鈥檙e really interested in.

IAN [00:34:52] I think so we have to rap up unfortunately. I think what you've just said was perfect. So Backstage is obviously full of developers and the sort of the cutting edge developers, and if we can get round a table and just kind of give a kind of... if you're able to talk to a huge community like Backstage in one go and say think about this one thing, what would that thing be? From my point of view I think APIs and RSF really are driving that.. you know, people to build systems and services in ways that they want rather than a way that may be a corporation wants. And so that helps to I think narrow the accessibility gap in some way so people can kind of maybe take a page and grease monkey it in their own way to make the text bigger or the images smaller, so that they can navigate it a lot easier, but if we can go round people just one last time. I鈥檒l start with you Gareth, you know, what would you say to the kind of cutting edge developers out there?

GARETH [00:36:03] I think you should remember something that Molly Holzschlag said, and she talks about accessibility as designing for yourself because she calls everybody TABs 鈥� temporarily able-bodied, and if you're designing for stuff that鈥檚 going to influence the future and change the way that the web is and the way broadcasting etc, she said design it and make sure it鈥檚 accessible. Turn it into the culture of the way that we build content because sooner or later you'll need it yourself.

JULIE [00:36:28] I would say there鈥檚 one word that鈥檚 pops into my mind and it鈥檚 鈥榦pen鈥�. As a developer, and certainly at the company I work at, it鈥檚 absolutely crucial to keep your mind open all of the time to the different ways in which people consume information, the different things that people want from the companies that you build sites for, and just keep the conversation open. When I worked at RNIB and disabled people would approach RNIB: 鈥淐an鈥檛 use this website, what can you do to help?鈥� The most helpful thing I could do was to open up a dialogue between the disabled person and the service provider and then in most cases the problem was solved. If everybody was open to exchanging views and ideas and asking each party what they think and being open to listening and to responding, I think the future will be a lot brighter.

ANDY [00:37:19] I think the majority of developers I know are very aware of accessibility issues and I think I.. you know, the kind of circles I move in are very much revolving around web standards and separation of content and presentational behaviour. The thing I would say is.. you know, whenever you are creating web applications that use JavaScript frameworks, whatever, make sure that the tools that you choose do allow for progressive enhancement and graceful degradation. But like I said earlier, I think a lot of the problems that the developer community are suffering now has nothing to do with understanding the issues of and the needs of people with accessibility requirements, it is because we are now at the moment butting up against the limits of technology and I think it鈥檚 time for people like (Frindham?) scientific, to step up to the plate and really start engaging with the developing community. I know a lot... I鈥檝e been to lots of presentations. I鈥檝e been to lots of talks about accessibility where the accessibility consultants and developers and the screen reader manufacturers are never present, and I know a lot of people that are trying to get information off the screen reader manufacturers to engage with them in a dialogue and they鈥檙e not responding. So I think it鈥檚 their responsibility to start engaging as much as the developer community.

JONATHAN [00:38:34] Oh Ian, I鈥檓 not sure I鈥檓.. came with such a large gamut in those last three I鈥檓 not sure I really want to compete with that. I can鈥檛 even remember what the question is to be particular but I feel the community.. the unemployed and the people with very low literacy are getting very quickly separated both economically and in terms of knowledge, access to knowledge, that it鈥檚 really critical to a country moving forward, you know, the UK or... you know, the broader community moving forward, that we engage them in the IT revolution that we鈥檙e all engaged in. So I鈥檓 hoping that some other developers out there will contribute and I鈥檓 very excited. Bepo came out in it鈥檚 graphical format about 2000 and I鈥檓 very excited that the iPhone has a very similar type of a look to it and it appears to be very popular format. I鈥檓 actually working on a more integrated pictorial format at the moment but I hope some people have produced some graphical interfaces in a more iconic or symbol, photographic that will move away from the text experience that the web has been for the past decade.

KATH [00:39:59] I agree with everything that everyone has said already and I think probably.. people are probably going to be so excited by all that, they鈥檒l probably run off and develop into something new already. What would I say? I would say little and often, as my mother always says. I would say if you're developing a web2 application think a little bit about accessibility with every iteration that you do, even that is every cycle of development, even if you can鈥檛 resolve all of the issues you can still do something. You don鈥檛 know that what you're creating now might be the next FaceBook, it might be the next Twitter, and don鈥檛 develop something that an investor isn鈥檛 going to want to invest in. Develop something that鈥檚 got some accessibility in it, so when you go to sell it, it might be the killer rat because it might be the one that those disabled people out there 鈥� and there鈥檚 12 million of them 鈥� everyone wants to use the new social networking web2 applications and you could be the first one who comes along with the accessible product so go for it.

NICK [00:41:07] So I haven鈥檛 got... I鈥檓 trying to follow everyone else鈥檚 lead on this but obviously not quite so much to say, but I think what I would say to developers out there and considering this is, as Julie was saying before, to involve disabled people in the process. There鈥檚 lots of things that we鈥檝e done in our standard previously and then we鈥檝e had discussions with people and we鈥檝e considered and changed from the standards. I think what I would suggest people do is try to find out about accessibility. A lot of developers do know about accessibility but try and consider the needs of the disabled. If you have experience in these areas, trying to contribute to common ground so other people can learn. Try to take issue with people that aren鈥檛 making the grade, you know, if you've got large sites that are just using things like capture actually address that and say.. you know: you're stopping people from getting into your site, and that鈥檚 about that.

MATT [00:42:15] Well thanks very much. That鈥檚 the end of the podcast. Our thanks to Gareth Ford-Williams, Julie Howell, Andy Budd, Jonathan Chetwynd, Kath Moonan, Nick Holmes and our very own Ian Forrester. My name is Matthew Cashmore and you can join us for the next Backstage podcast in the next few weeks. The debate carries on on backstage.bbc.co.uk.

[00:42:35]
(Recording ends)