One other potential area for such tools is as a proofing aid for those who
normally read documents. I've heard people mention this and it's
something I'd like to try. Unfortunately Browseraloud doesn't seem to be
usable in this context as it doesn't read an entire document - jst the
current paragraph.
Brian
------------------------------------------------------
Brian Kelly, UK Web Focus
UKOLN, University of Bath, BATH, England, BA2 7AY
Email: [log in to unmask] URL: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/
Homepage: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/b.kelly/
Phone: 01225 323943 FAX: 01225 826838
On Wed, 14 May 2003, Laurence Cornford wrote:
> > > In other words, for a person with a serious visual impairment to
> >effectively
> >> use a *computer*, do they only need a voice-enabled browser, or do they
> >> actually require a screen reader that operates at the OS level?
> >
> >There is a huge range of variability in visual and cognitive impairment;
> >so I think the right attitude is to offer a set of tools and let each
> >person choose the set which solves their problems.
> >
> >it need not just be visually-impaired people, remember. it might
> >be dyslexics who find it easier to listen than read.
>
> I've got to agree with Matt (and not just because he's a colleague).
> Ever since this strand started I've been wondering why you would want
> to do this? People who want or need to have web pages read to them
> will probably already have a system set up on their computer to do
> that. Well formed html/xml is easy to interpret by voice
> synthesizers. Some operating systems won't have such software as
> standard, but they are likely to be older ones that won't be able to
> use this system anyway.
>
> The dyslexic argument is interesting, but I'm not convinced. Again,
> there are ranges of severity, and both an audio and visual stimulus,
> provided it doesn't "overload" the user, will improve information
> retention. But the web is already a comparatively stimulating
> environment. Poorly designed user interfaces are a bigger obstacle to
> people with dyslexia than being able to read pages. Good web pages
> already condense their information into unfussy, bit-sized chunks and
> a good search engine means one can hone-in on information which might
> take hours to locate in a traditional library.
>
> In other words, well written web pages will have a far greater
> impact, while a badly written page will cause problems regardless of
> whether it's read on a screen, from print, or through a voice
> synthesizer. If it were a book I had to access I might want it as an
> audio book, but in most cases web sites don't function like books.
> Advice from people like the British Dyslexia Association can be
> summed up as "follow the W3C WAI and make your text's meaning as
> plain as possible". I don't hear them calling for voice synthesizers
> on web sites.
>
> You might also like to know that a high percentage of dyslexic users
> prefer to use Apple Macs because the GUI is less rigid and can be
> adapted to the user's preferred method of working. So that fact that
> "Browsealoud" only works on I.E. on a PC is partly self-defeating --
> you are already excluding some dyslexic users from this service.
>
> My essential point is that I don't see what problem "Browsealoud" is
> trying to solve?
>
> Maybe the feedback from Sebastian's trial run of the service will
> tell me, and I do ask that he post a brief summary of his trial so
> that we can get an idea if this was something that did solve a need.
> But I have my doubts that it will be used beyond the novelty value.
>
> Regards,
> Laurence
>
> --
> Laurence J. Cornford
> Corporate Information and Computer Services
> The University of Sheffield
> 285 Glossop Road
> Sheffield
> S10 2HB
>
> tel. 0114 222 1191
>
|