Internet Marketing - Matt Bailey [142]
Image Maps
A second main issue addressed in the lawsuit (though closely related to alt attributes in this case) was image maps. Image maps are images that provide links to multiple destinations based on where the visitor clicks the image. If a visitor cannot see the image, then the image map and the links provided are useless. None of the images maps on the Target website provided alternative attributes.
Mouse-Only Programming
The third issue raised was that part of the website was programmed specifically for user interaction through a mouse. Only a mouse click and mouse navigation could navigate through a section of the website. Though rarely deployed by sighted users, most websites allow for keyboard-based navigation using the arrow, Tab, and Enter keys. This may come as a surprise to some, but the mouse is a vision-oriented tool, because it relies on eye-hand coordination. Blind assistive technology users “read” by hearing the content read to them and navigate by using the keyboard as the primary interface tool. When a command is programmed to execute only by a mouse click, then keyboard users cannot continue in the process.
This lawsuit brought a number of issues to light and also provided a means for the accessibility community to voice their needs for using websites. However, all three of the major issues raised by the lawsuit were not issues solely for the benefit of the accessibility community. For instance, any number of circumstances could cause the images on a website not to show, and any user, sighted or otherwise, would be at a loss for further instructions.
Contingency Planning
I was staying at a busy hotel during a large technology convention. The speed of the connection was so slow that when I attempted to connect to the Internet in my hotel room, I wasn’t sure I was successful. The connection timed out, only a few images loaded, and none of the images had alternative attributes. I was left to guess which area of the site to click in order to gain access. This is a helpless feeling and one that assistive technology visitors experience often.
Providing alternative attributes and keyboard navigation, rather than mouse-only, allows visitors, regardless of vision, easier access to a site’s functions. Developers always should make contingency plans for something being out of their control. Part of that contingency planning is the use of the alternative attribute in images. No one can control how their website will be rendered on a device, which browser will load it, how fast the connection speed will be, or what other programs may be running to help the visitor understand the website. When making contingency plans for these types of situations, alternative attributes are simply smart business.
Search
The improvements that the NFB was asking from Target would have ultimately made the Target website better for search engines. Outside of the lawsuit, one could make an argument for the business case of fixing these issues for the site to be more search engine friendly. Adding alt attributes to images would enable the search engines to get more context from the pages and images on the Target website. In addition, replacing more of the text that was contained in pictures with HTML text would have helped even more—for both assistive technology users and search engines.
This is one of the most amazingly overlooked issues in accessibility. That is, that the needs of search engines and of assistive technologies are often the same need to be able to gather the HTML text from the page and interpret the markup of the text: headlines, headings, linked text, bullet points, content, and image alt attributes. Both need to be able to read, interpret, and output the content. Search engines need to store it and use it for the ranking algorithm. For assistive technology users, it needs to be read, processed, or manipulated and output for various devices. Either way, if a designer or website owner neglects the principles of accessibility, they are