Log in

Accessify Forum - Accessibility Discussion

Latest Tweets

Err. Sorry. Haven't quite got the hang of multiple accounts on @seesmic just yet! :-(

Yesterday

@mollydotcom going on the #HTML5 demystification! :-)

Yesterday

Web #accessibility training in Edinburgh this fall: about WCAG2, understand WAI-ARIA, more http://www.rnib.org.uk... - Gary

2 days ago, RT: @webaxe

Blog RE practical research into #HTML5 & #accessibility - http://www.accessiblec... by @jkiss - Gary

2 days ago, RT: @stcaccess RT @Meera404

.@v may I suggest you add November's Accessing Higher Ground accessibility conference to lanyrd.com, too? http://j.mp/bbPai...

2 days ago, RT: @stcaccess

Read more...

Currently Online

No registered users are online.

Screen-reader pronunciation quirks

  • Reply to topic
  • Post new topic

Home / Site Building & Testing / Screen-reader pronunciation quirks

Reply with quote Hi all

I recently read a document from the RNIB where they suggest using the phrase ‘Skip to main content’ rather than just ‘Skip to Content”. Why? Apparently screen readers can mispronounce the word ‘content’ by putting the emphasis on the second syllable. Test is in JAWS and you’ll see they are right. I presume that since it is only a short phrase it has little context for the words so it guesses incorrectly.

This got me wondering whether anyone has found similar quirks during their browsing or testing? Maybe even someone has built a resource we can all reference? Or may be I should do it? Perhaps such a resource might be useful as a starting point for those who can’t afford screen readers?

One other: I remember a few years ago that some speech synthesis software I was using would pronounce ‘e-mail’ correctly but not ‘email’ (quite rightly I’d say). It seems that JAWS does not have this problem (though I’m sure it has said ‘e dash mail’ to me!)

Anyone got any more? Any language accepted though beyond English I’m a typical useless Brit Embarassed

Cheers
Kevin
Reply with quote I don't think we should code/write for buggy software (with the exception of some adaptations for IE/Win due to its inexplicable ubiquity). If JAWS pronounces 'content' wrong in this context, it's up to Freedom Scientific to fix the bug. I'm quite sure that JAWS users are smart enough to understand what we're saying anyway.

When I tried pwWebSpeak, I found that it doesn't like things like using &#8217; instead of a proper apostrophe. It doesn't know how to pronounce it, so it makes a short pause. Contractions like "it's" would then be read as "it<short_pause>s". Well ... you should have heard it try to pronounce 'Åsnorrbodarna' ... Laughing

I saw a demonstration where a blind guy showed us how he used his screen reader. It was Window-Eyes, and the program was an English version, but it had a Swedish dictionary/library. Thus it pronounced everything as if it were in Swedish – including the English phrases that Window-Eyes sent it! Shocked

It took us a while to understand the gobbledygook, but I finally realised that it was saying 'page loading'. It pronounced it something like 'pah-geh loo-ah-ding'. Laughing
_________________
Tommy has left the building
Reply with quote Gez has a pretty comprehensive chart at Juicy Studio that catalogs the various assistive device quirks. May not be quite what you're looking for, but it's a good start …
Reply with quote
Nathan wrote:
Gez has a pretty comprehensive chart at...

Thanks. I'll take a look.
Reply with quote Tommy, you've brightened my day already. Thanks!

JAWS can do the language swtiching thing. Hours of fun Smile And I'm pretty sure I couldn't pronounce Åsnorrbodarna (though I can type it).

Back to the subject...

TOOLman wrote:
I don't think we should code/write for buggy software


Is this really writing for buggy software? I'd see it as being quite helpful. Perhaps it should be classified under the 'until user agents...' category? Wink

Maybe this is the only example but it was worth asking.

Cheers
Kevin
Reply with quote Don't worry, Kevin. Few native Swedes could pronounce Åsnorrbodarna correctly. Laughing

What I mean is, we should be careful trying to work around quirks in software. I wouldn't consider this particular thing to be a bug. What if we do a workaround, and then they fix the issue and our workaround stops working instead?

Also, let's not underestimate the intelligence of our visitors. (We shouldn't overestimate it either, but that's another issue. Very Happy)
_________________
Tommy has left the building
Reply with quote I agree with Tommy. The onus is on the user(agent), to coin a phrase. Wink It needs to learn how to speak better, just like software like Dragon Naturally Speaking need to learn how to listen better. For crying out loud, if you're paying £600 for JAWS, you are in a position to be able to demand improvements.

On the flipside, JAWS users know how it says "content"... they are they experts, and we shouldn't interfere.
_________________
Kajun
Reply with quote
Kajun wrote:
The onus is on the user(agent), to coin a phrase. Wink

That's more like counterfeiting ... Wink
_________________
Tommy has left the building

  • Reply to topic
  • Post new topic

Display posts from previous:   

All times are GMT

Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum