Screen Reader User Survey by WebAIM

[Justin]

Hi Mike,

Thanks for the info.

- Justin

On 2-Feb-09, at 11:10 AM, Michael S Elledge wrote:

> Hi Justin--
>
> That would indeed be great info to have. My guess is that they are  
> usually pretty basic and involve verbosity levels (speed, amount of  
> information spoken) rather than customized short-cut keys. But I  
> don't have any hard data on that.
>
> It may be that Freedom Scientific has some info about that or the  
> NFB or ACB.
>
> Mike
>
> Justin wrote:
>> Hi Mike,
>>
>> Thanks for sending this out.
>>
>> I was interested in your second point below and checked out the  
>> site, but didn't really find much more information there. Would you  
>> happen to know what some of the common customizations are? Or where  
>> I might be able to find information on that?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Justin
>>
>>
>> On 2-Feb-09, at 10:40 AM, Michael S Elledge wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Everyone--
>>>
>>> WebAIM has done a survey among 1100 screen reader users:
>>>
>>> http://webaim.org/projects/screenreadersurvey/
>>>
>>> I'd love to dig into the data some more, but a couple of points  
>>> are worth noting:
>>>
>>> 1. Expertise varies a great deal (17% expert, 41% advanced, 32%  
>>> intermediate, 9% beginner). Expertise (no surprise) influences the  
>>> difficulty of using certain formats.
>>> 2. Over two-thirds (69%) of screen reader users have customized  
>>> their settings a lot or somewhat.
>>> 3. IE is still used the most by blind persons, but Firefox has a  
>>> healthy share (about a third).
>>> 4. Headings are the most frequently used assistive method to  
>>> navigate (76% whenever available or often)
>>> 5. Search is used somewhat less often (51% whenever available or  
>>> often)
>>> 6. Skip links and accesskeys are used much less frequently (38%  
>>> whenever available or often--another 28% use them sometimes).
>>> 7. Screen reader users were much more interested in having  
>>> descriptions for images that enhanced the mood of a web page than  
>>> evaluators (71% vs. 35%).
>>> 8. Flash was considered very or somewhat difficult to use (71%),  
>>> Acrobat/PDF was less difficult (48%), Frames were much less so  
>>> (27% very or somewhat difficult).
>>> 9. Most users couldn't answer whether 2.0 or DHTML applications  
>>> were difficult (54%), of the others 28% thought they were  
>>> accessible, 18% didn't.
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________________
>>> fluid-work mailing list - fluid-work at fluidproject.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives,
>>> see http://fluidproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work
>>
>>
>>