![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Whose Responsibility is Accessibility?
Oct. 15th, 2014 06:41 pmOne of the innovations that Freedom Scientific has implemented in the upcoming JAWS 16 release is an extension of its Convenient OCR feature which allows inaccessible PDF files, such as those comprised of document images rather than the documents' text, to be optically recognized and read by the screen reader.
FS has faced some criticism for this feature. The critics argue that, if the screen reader can recognize inaccessible PDFs and read them, PDF file designers will not feel compelled to create accessible PDF files.
While I understand this viewpoint, I cannot share it. It may well be true that a small number of PDF producers who might otherwise have considered making their PDFs accessible may now decide that it is no longer necessary, but consider the alternative in a reality where there will always be some PDFs that are not accessible. Should the blind consumer be locked out of access to these files because some other blind people opposed this JAWS feature? Inaccessible PDFs can mean lost business opportunities, even lost jobs. These are more than just inconveniences in a world where making one's living is already difficult enough. Is it worth that, on the grounds that, hey, at least I didn't give in by using OCR on their PDFs? I think not. Blind people should not have to sacrifice because of inaccessible PDFs; nor should they have to sacrifice because other blind people refused to accept an innovation based on a principle. Principles are good, we all have them, we all need them. But some principles are important and thus much more worth fighting for. And is the cost of fighting for this principle worth it? How important is the gain of perhaps encouraging a few people to make their PDFs accessible (and there are certainly no guarantees) versus the cost to members of the blind community?
My father always taught me to pick my battles. Choose the battles, he said, where you stand a chance of winning. If you expend all your energy on exercises in futility, you won't have any left for the times when you actually can make a difference. Also, he said, look at the big picture. Consider that your actions will affect not just you, but others as well, and in ways you may not have considered.
It's easy to stand up against this brilliant use of Convenient OCR in JAWS when you have nothing personally riding on it. It is also selfish and narrow-minded, and does not take into account the person your fight may in fact be hurting.
Should creators of PDF documents be compelled to make a PDF accessible? In most cases, absolutely. But there will always be PDFs that, for one reason or another, are not accessible, and I applaud Freedom Scientific for providing computer users with yet one more tool to help level the playing field.
FS has faced some criticism for this feature. The critics argue that, if the screen reader can recognize inaccessible PDFs and read them, PDF file designers will not feel compelled to create accessible PDF files.
While I understand this viewpoint, I cannot share it. It may well be true that a small number of PDF producers who might otherwise have considered making their PDFs accessible may now decide that it is no longer necessary, but consider the alternative in a reality where there will always be some PDFs that are not accessible. Should the blind consumer be locked out of access to these files because some other blind people opposed this JAWS feature? Inaccessible PDFs can mean lost business opportunities, even lost jobs. These are more than just inconveniences in a world where making one's living is already difficult enough. Is it worth that, on the grounds that, hey, at least I didn't give in by using OCR on their PDFs? I think not. Blind people should not have to sacrifice because of inaccessible PDFs; nor should they have to sacrifice because other blind people refused to accept an innovation based on a principle. Principles are good, we all have them, we all need them. But some principles are important and thus much more worth fighting for. And is the cost of fighting for this principle worth it? How important is the gain of perhaps encouraging a few people to make their PDFs accessible (and there are certainly no guarantees) versus the cost to members of the blind community?
My father always taught me to pick my battles. Choose the battles, he said, where you stand a chance of winning. If you expend all your energy on exercises in futility, you won't have any left for the times when you actually can make a difference. Also, he said, look at the big picture. Consider that your actions will affect not just you, but others as well, and in ways you may not have considered.
It's easy to stand up against this brilliant use of Convenient OCR in JAWS when you have nothing personally riding on it. It is also selfish and narrow-minded, and does not take into account the person your fight may in fact be hurting.
Should creators of PDF documents be compelled to make a PDF accessible? In most cases, absolutely. But there will always be PDFs that, for one reason or another, are not accessible, and I applaud Freedom Scientific for providing computer users with yet one more tool to help level the playing field.
