Buscador

Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta Accessibility Overlay. Mostrar todas las entradas
Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta Accessibility Overlay. Mostrar todas las entradas

miércoles, 14 de febrero de 2024

Cuatro empresas de capas de accesibilidad han amenazado con denunciar a sus críticos

En Ethical Problems with Overlays and How to Overcome Them podemos leer:
Overlay vendors engage in attacks against their critics, including lawsuits and threats of legal action.
To date, I am aware of four overlay vendors who have threatened to sue their critics, and two of those have done so. Both FACIL'iti and AudioEye have filed lawsuits against critics. These lawsuits have been characterized by some in this field as a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP), which is a tactic specifically used to not only silence the critic being sued but to also create a chilling effect on future criticism.

miércoles, 7 de febrero de 2024

Retirada la denuncia contra Adrian Roselli por parte de AudioEye


Ahora, el propio Adrian Roselli cuenta en su blog que la denuncia ha sido retirada: #AudioEye Has Dropped Its Suit Against Me.

Las partes han llegado a un acuerdo que es confidencial, pero una de las cláusulas del acuerdo que se ha hecho pública es lo siguiente:
As part of this settlement, and with the hopes of continuing to work toward digital accessibility, AudioEye has agreed to make a financial contribution of no less than $10,000 to National Federation for the Blind.

miércoles, 31 de enero de 2024

Dos expertos en accesibilidad web denunciados en Francia por una empresa de capas de accesibilidad

Un caso similar al de Adrian Roselli, experto en accesibilidad web, denunciado por hablar de las capas de accesibilidad (accessibility overlays), pero ahora en Francia: Accessibility Advocates Sued by French Overlay Company. El artículo dice:
FACIL’iti  is a French accessibility overlay company. The company sued two accessibility leaders who participated in a conversation about accessibility overlays alleging defamation. On the side of the defendants, many describe this as a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation  (SLAPP). 
“In French the equivalent of a SLAPP suit is ‘poursuites bâillons’ (literally ‘gagging pursuits’). Strategic Prosecutions Altering the Public Debate is a detailed report (in French) on the dangers of and potential reforms for this phenomenon in France,” writes Lainey Feingold in an article about the French Overlay Company lawsuit .

viernes, 15 de diciembre de 2023

Opinión de la Comisión Europea sobre las capas de accesibilidad

En Accessibility overlays:
Automatically repairing accessibility issues requires that those issues can be found automatically. Claims that a website can be made fully compliant without manual intervention are not realistic, since no automated tool can cover all the WCAG 2.1 level A and AA criteria. It is even less realistic to expect to detect automatically the additional EN 301549 criteria. Moreover, automatic repair is more challenging than the automatic detection of accessibility failures. 

In addition, some overlay tools have been reported to interfere with the assistive technologies used by people with disabilities. In other words, overlay tools may make a website less accessible for some users.

Tools claiming to make a site fully compliant can be distinguished from a different category of tools, namely widgets built into webpages that allow users to adapt certain aspects of a site to their own needs or preferences. These include the ATbar and UI Options These tools do not claim to solve any accessibility issues on a site but assume (and possibly require) a basic level of accessibility.

Neither of the above categories of tools can substitute for the manual work of making a site accessible. DG COMM cannot endorse any tools or products that fall into the categories of overlay tools or widgets.

miércoles, 29 de noviembre de 2023

Lo que piensa Google sobre las capas de accesibilidad

En Inclusive Marketing - Disabled people se explica lo siguiente sobre las capas de accesibilidad (accessibility overlay):

Consider the limitations of overlays: Web overlay widgets are a popular way to attempt to improve website accessibility automatically. While these add-ons try to improve certain features, they do not address the root issues necessary to reach full compliance and may even interfere with the website’s proper functioning.



viernes, 14 de julio de 2023

Adrian Roselli, experto en accesibilidad web, denunciado por hablar de las capas de accesibilidad (accessibility overlays)

Muy sorprendente todo lo que se cuenta en New Low in the Accessibility “Industry:” Overlay Company Sues Globally-Recognized Accessibility Expert:

This is an article about a lawsuit filed against a digital accessibility advocate named Adrian Roselli.  Adrian has been outspoken against a type of software called an overlay. This type of overlay promises to make websites accessible for disabled people with just one line of code. Lainey has criticized this software too. Adrian was sued by AudioEye, a company that sells overlays.  It is Lainey’s opinion that this lawsuit is a SLAPP suit. Those initials stand for “Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation.”  Adrian has been part of an urgent global dialogue about harms caused by overlays. And about their failure to meet the promise of website accessibility. Lainey urges AudioEye and its lawyers at a big global law firm called Akin to drop this lawsuit.

miércoles, 29 de marzo de 2023

Comentarios en Twitter sobre las capas de accesibilidad (accessibility overlay)

Hace unos pocos días pude leer la siguiente discusión en Twitter:






lunes, 13 de febrero de 2023

La industria responde a las críticas contra las capas de accesibilidad

Las capas de accesibilidad (accessibility overlays) es una tecnología que promete solucionar los problemas de accesibilidad de un sitio web con muy poco esfuerzo. Claro, para el propietario de un sitio web que necesite ser accesible, este tipo de soluciones son una maravilla. Pero es como las dietas milagro: pierde peso rápidamente, a veces poniendo en riesgo tu salud, para luego en unos pocos meses volver a recuperarlo.

En el sitio web Overlay False Claims se desmontan varias de las afirmaciones que emplean los fabricantes de este producto para anunciarlo y venderlo.

Ahora alguno de los fabricantes, o quizás varios que se han unido, han montado OverlayFacts para contrarrestar el sitio web Overlay False Claims.

Según un tuit de Karl Groves, uno de los máximos gurús de la accesibilidad web, es posible que detrás de OverlayFacts esté AccessiBe, una de esas empresas que vende accessibility overlays:



miércoles, 16 de marzo de 2022

Afirmaciones falsas sobre las "capas de accesibilidad"

En Overlay False Claims se recogen las siguiente afirmaciones falsas que suelen exponer las empresas que venden "capas de accesibilidad":

  1. Claim: Adding the product is the only thing the customer needs to do for accessibility
  2. Claim: By using the product, the customer's site will become compliant with the ADA and other relevant regulations and standards
  3. Claim: By using the product, the customer's site will attain compliance in an extremely short period of time
  4. Claim: By using the product, the customer's website will be accessible to everyone
  5. Claim: By using the product, the customer will be shielded from litigation
  6. Claim: The product is the only one on the market that can make the customer's site compliant
  7. Claim: The product alone is sufficient in achieving compliance without any other work needed on the underlying code
  8. Claim: Increased conversion rates
  9. Claim: Exaggerated number of customers
  10. Claim: Specific brands as customers which are not
  11. Claim: That the overlay widget is a suitable alternative to assistive technologies
  12. Claim: Collaboration with 3rd parties with whom they have not done so

viernes, 4 de marzo de 2022

Posición de IAAP sobre las capas de accesibilidad

Hace un par de meses, la International Association of Accessibility Professionals (IAAP) lanzó una Encuesta de IAAP sobre las capas de accesibilidad.

Ahora, el 25 de febrero pasado, IAAP ha publicado Overlay Position and Recommendations, donde dice:
IAAP believes that Overlays, plugins, or widgets must never impede access to users’ assistive technology, choice of browsers and/or operating system features. IAAP therefore does not support members making false claims about any products or services which could be harmful, either directly or indirectly, to end-users, including people with disabilities, or the integrity of the accessibility profession. More specifically, in relation to Overlay technologies, at this time companies should refrain from using marketing language implying that a website or application can be made fully accessible to all people with disabilities by simply installing a plugin or widget without requiring additional steps or services.

IAAP stands with people with disabilities, accessibility advocates, and accessibility professionals in acknowledging the deceptive nature of marketing claims that a single addition of a line of code, plugin, or widget, on its own, provides full compliance with web accessibility standards, mandates, regulations, or laws currently.

viernes, 21 de enero de 2022

Encuesta de IAAP sobre las capas de accesibilidad

Me ha llegado un correo de International Association of Accessibility Professionals (IAAP) para participar en una encuesta sobre las capas de accesibilidad.

El correo dice:

We are fully aware of the concerns regarding false advertising and deceptive marketing issues by some overlay vendors and the dangers that they may present.

IAAP does not support vendors making false claims or participating in deceptive marketing on or about their own or others’ products and services.

The IAAP Overlays Task Force is currently conducting due diligence on the issue to determine IAAP’s course of action considering experts’ advice and members’ perspectives.

As an association IAAP follows antitrust compliance protocol and best practices, which include:
  • Ethics codes should never be created or used to exclude competitors from the market
  • Associations should document all complaints or concerns about the code and resolve them as appropriate
  • Ethics code should be clear and unambiguous, reasonable, fair, and objective and
  • Associations should maintain strict confidentiality with respect to all adverse allegations, complaints, actions, and proceedings.
IAAP is not in the job of censorship or lobbying. Our mission is to expand the accessibility profession through certification, education, and networking. However, IAAP’s leadership recognizes the importance of the role and trust we play as a unified voice for our members. We take this very seriously.

Our goal is to be part of the solution. With that in mind, IAAP’s Task Force of volunteer council members has been working over the last three-month interviewing, reviewing association protocol, and collecting data from members and non-members. The Overlay Task Force will submit its findings to the IAAP Global Leadership Council on February 17th and then follow up with approved next steps including a:
  • an organization position statement from IAAP
  • review and revision of IAAP’s code of conduct terms
  • review process of organization members with alleged false claims
  • awareness and education plan around overlay

lunes, 27 de diciembre de 2021

Las "capas de accesibilidad" pueden empeorar la accesibilidad de un sitio web

 En Why Accessibility Overlays On Your Website Can Make Things Worse podemos leer:

So that’s settled: Websites should be accessible to all users, regardless of their abilities. The real question for webmasters is how to reach this goal. Starting in the 1990s, tech companies began to offer third-party web products that introduce accessibility features to existing sites without altering the source code. Some of these overlays add text-to-speech capabilities to read page content out loud. Others include controls that allow users to resize text or swap out color schemes. 

But the latest generation of overlays go further: They scan web pages for accessibility issues and try to automate fixes.

[...]

These automated fixes sound helpful, but in practice they can be insufficient or even frustrating for the users they try to serve. For instance, auto-generated alt text is often strange and irrelevant, creating more confusion than clarity for people who use screen readers. Adjusted keyboard navigation sometimes fails. And the user interface control panels can themselves interfere with screen readers, braille devices, and other assistive technology. 

[...]

At best, then, these automated overlays are usually unnecessary. People who use screen readers or other assistive technologies must navigate to a website in the first place. They browse other websites and use other digital tools. That means they’ll already have assistive features integrated into their systems — and the overlay may interfere with these existing tools. In other words, to access an overlay widget, users must have already navigated to that widget, which means they likely have the tools they need. 

lunes, 22 de noviembre de 2021

Otra crítica a las capas de accesibilidad

En There’s no such thing as fully automated web accessibility:

Protect yourself and your company from buying an ineffective product that claims it makes websites accessible.

[...]

Fully automated accessibility solutions are the magic slippers of accessibility. They sound nice, but they don’t exist and can’t exist.

[...]

The product these companies try to sell you is fantasy. Websites cannot be made fully accessible with automated solutions.

lunes, 13 de septiembre de 2021

Lo que opinan los expertos sobre las capas de accesibilidad

En enero de 2021, WebAIM realizó su tercera encuesta dirigida a profesionales de la accesibilidad web. La encuesta recibió 758 respuestas válidas. 

Una de las preguntas de la encuesta fue:

¿Cómo calificaría la efectividad de las capas de accesibilidad, complementos o widgets de accesibilidad web que automatizan los cambios de accesibilidad en las páginas web?

Y la respuesta fue:


En español:

  • Muy efectivo: 3.3% de las respuestas.
  • Algo efectivo: 27.8% de las respuestas
  • No muy efectivo: 32.0%
  • Nada efectivo: 37.0%

lunes, 6 de septiembre de 2021

¿Cuándo pueden ser buenas las "capas de accesibilidad"?

Las "capas de accesibilidad" (accessibility overlays) son soluciones software que prometen mejorar la accesibilidad de un sitio web de forma casi instantánea. En entradas anteriores he comentado que estas soluciones reciben muchas críticas.

En What are accessibility overlays good for? se ofrece un punto de vista un poco distinto y se razona que estas soluciones pueden ser útiles en ciertas situaciones.

Además, el artículo incluye una lista de proveedores de "capas de accesibilidad":


Alchemy by Level Access

Amaze by Deque Systems

Sentinel by Tenon

Reachdeck by TextHelp

Readspeaker

accessiBe

AudioEye

EqualWeb

FACIL’iti

MaxAccess

Purple Lens

User1st

Userway

viernes, 4 de junio de 2021

Otra crítica a los "accessibility overlay"

En Accessibility Overlays May Not Make Your Site More Accessible se presenta otra crítica a los "accessibility overlays", las capas de accesibilidad que prometen resolver los problemas de accesibilidad de un sitio web con unas pocas líneas de código:

Overlays are software products that can be easily added to existing websites. They detect and attempt to correct accessibility issues by “overlaying” additional code on the webpage. Companies market their products as easy-to-implement accessibility solutions that achieve compliance, in some cases even promising protection from litigation.

En Estados Unidos, parece que esta solución no protege de ser demandado:

But accessibility advocates say overlays are not acceptable substitutes for developing accessible websites. In March, a petition called the Overlay Fact Sheet began circulating, which called on websites to stop relying on overlays as quick fixes for accessibility issues.

And overlays don’t necessarily prevent lawsuits, either. In 2020, over 250 lawsuits were filed against companies that used overlays.

Y pueden producir sus propios problemas:

Sometimes overlay tools can create accessibility problems of their own. Beijers said an earlier overlay issue that has since been fixed was an aggressive start-up process that interfered with screen readers being able to read the contents of webpages.

Many users have their own trusted accessibility tools to help them navigate the web. But these tools can only work optimally when used on websites that are good at accommodating them. Developing accessible websites means creating pages flexible enough to work well with accessibility tools. Flexibility is important because different users have different needs — some low-vision users require large text size, while others have narrow fields of vision and prefer small text size within a narrow frame.

“There are end user tools, but the webpages still need to support those tools, and they need to be adaptable,” Smith said. “The page needs to support that adaptation without it totally falling apart and breaking.”

The problem with overlays is that, instead of making websites flexible enough to accommodate accessibility tools, they often make pages more rigid, less adaptable and sometimes even override user preferences.

“What these tools do is make your page more flexible in these very specific ways,” Smith said. “And it’s kind of forcing the user into this specific pattern or experience that may not actually be best for that user, because you’re removing that end-user control.”

Some users have found overlays so disruptive to their own accessibility tools that they rig their browsers to block them. Accessibyebye is an extension for the Chrome browser that will block select overlay products from working.

miércoles, 19 de mayo de 2021

Una crítica a las capas de accesibilidad

 Muy interesante la crítica a las capas de accesibilidad (accessibility overlay) que se presenta en The Dangerous Path of the Accessibility Overlay:

Without naming any names – because it doesn’t really matter which tool it is – an accessibility overlay is a tool that fundamentally harms the future of web site accessibility. The nature of accessibility testing is to expose issues to a human being who can then act on those issues. An accessibility overlay, by nature, avoids exposing what problems it has addressed to a human being.

This is a crucial difference that has a long-term impact on the accessibility of the entire internet. When a tool provides feedback to a person for them to act on, that is education. Somebody has to work with that data, look at the source and interaction, and take action. In that process, they will learn more about what it takes to make a website accessible, and will hopefully make the same mistakes less frequently in the future.

An accessibility overlay affords no such benefit.

viernes, 16 de abril de 2021

Manifiesto en contra de los accessibility overlays

Varios cientos de profesionales de la accesibilidad web han firmado en Overlay Fact Sheet un manifiesto en contra de los accessibility overlays que prometen resolver los problemas de accesibilidad de un sitio web con una sola línea de código.

lunes, 16 de noviembre de 2020

Una crítica a los sistemas que prometen accesibilidad web con una sola línea

 Según Eric Eggert, los accessibility overlay basados en inteligencia artificial no cumplen lo que prometen. Lo cuenta en su vídeo 5 False Claims 1-Line “AI” Accessibility Script Vendors Make:

Y el inicio de la transcripción:

They claim to be the be-all and end-all of all accessibility worries: “AI” accessibility tools. They say they provide “100% WCAG 2.1 compliance”. They say it only takes one line of JavaScript to “fix your website for accessibility”.

Who are “they”? VC-backed companies that promise affordable, effortless compliance for your website. If you think “that sounds too good to be true”, you’re right. It is indeed quite the opposite of true.

Here are five claims that “AI” accessibility script vendors make that are misleading or completely untrue.

(Intro.)

I’m Eric Eggert, a Web Accessibility Expert. You can follow me as @yatil — Y-A-T-I-L — on social media. If you have questions about this or other videos, or want to propose a topic, ask in the comments, or use the hashtag #askYatil on Twitter.

Before we get into it, whenever I say AI, please imagine the most expressive air-quotes gesture possible.

Okay!


viernes, 14 de agosto de 2020

Una excelente crítica de las capas de accesibilidad (accessibility overlay)

Karl Groves, un experto internacional en accesibilidad web, ha escrito What would an ethical overlay look like?:

Accessibility overlays have existed on the market since at least around 2004. Companies such as Readspeaker offered products that displayed a widget on customers’ websites that were best described as “add-on assistive technologies”. The primary feature offered by such products was the ability to read the page content aloud to a website’s users.
The benefit to such a feature would seem obvious to the layperson: If you have problems seeing the page or have problems reading, then a feature that reads the content for you would certainly be a significant improvement.  To people with deep knowledge of the Web and accessibility, the shortcomings of a per-site read-aloud widget are glaring. After all: if a user needs to have the content read-aloud to them on one site, they’ll need it on all websites and all applications they use.  In other words, such software is best deployed on the user’s computer, not on individual websites.
[...]

It is simply impossible to examine the claims made by overlay vendors against what their products actually do and come up with a conclusion that differs from the following: 
Overlay vendors overstate their products’ capabilities. They deceive their customers and, as a result, are actively harming the field of accessibility and doing a severe disservice to end users with disabilities. This, in turn, is a waste of money and delays active improvement to a website. These products will not make your site compliant with the ADA, Section 508, EN 301 549, or any other regulation based on WCAG.