Universal Accessibility icon...?
I personally don't really buy the open arms icon - I think it's too ambiguous. Does anyone know of any usability research to support this one?
Ideally there needs to be universal agreement for any solution to really be effective. And its design should be informed by cognitive psychology, to ensure that the icon is:
- unambiguous and unique
- recognisable and retainable
- easy to reproduce
- acceptable within all cultural contexts
James Coltham - Local gov web manager by day, web and accessibility blogger at lunchtime, freelancer by night. Tweets at @prettysimple.
Last edited by James Coltham on 16 Jun 2009 02:20 pm; edited 1 time in total
Share: 
I'm inclined to agree with Joe Clark that there's less specific need for a web accessibility icon than people might think. Given this, I think the aptly-named Tadpoleman is our best bet: it's universally understood to symbolise "access," which is appropriate for the Accessify Forum. 
Failing that, Apple "Universal Access" symbol (open-armed figure, same as for GNOME) is quite good.
I agree that Tadpoleman is unattractive and inaccurate, but it is also instantly recognisable and a justifiable metaphor.
Share:
Nice responses guys.
I'm going to have one last crack at the helping hand icon, just incase I can make it fit the criteria you rightly list.
watch this space... But again, keep the useful comments coming!
Share:
Ta da!
Any better?
Last edited by Phil Teare on 17 Jun 2009 09:05 pm; edited 2 times in total
Share:
Nice work Phil, it looks more like someone offering a helping hand than it did before.
I'm stuck in a rut with this whole issue of disability logos. I agree a universally accepted symbol that people could see, and immediately think "Good...I can get some help here." is of value. I don't particularly like the currently accepted one (person in wheelchair) because, as we all know, there are disabilities beyond the chair.
Trouble is, the current once is recognised worldwide.
Share:
cheers.
Who knows, it may catch on.
Share:
| Phil Teare wrote: |
| Who knows, it may catch on. |
Jack Pickard The Pickards Information Services| Blog | Twit
Share:
Glad you asked (I was just thinking of saying this).
As the creator of this work I here by declare this Icon to be in the public domain.
I would appreciate acknowledgement (I am Philip A. Teare) please contact me here if you do use it: Phil.a.teare -at- googlemail dot com
However, no such action is necessary in order to use, modify, copy or distribute the icon for any lawful purpose, commercial or otherwise.
I make no warranty of fitness for any purpose.
This is the 3 finger variant of the Helping Hand Icon, which may be better for smaller icons. And a png of the same
Last edited by Phil Teare on 17 Jun 2009 09:06 pm; edited 1 time in total
Share:
...just had a disturbing thought. Is it possible that a 'helping hand' logo may carry negative connotations, implying that the disabled have to be given a hand up and that they aren't capable of doing stuff like browsing the web on their own?Jack Pickard The Pickards Information Services| Blog | Twit
Share:
That thought had crossed mine too. I think only feedback from real live people will tell us. As I don't want to cause offense, but neither do I want to assume offense will be taken at this (being overly PC can also become patronizing, imho)
Anyone feel patronized by this (compared to alternatives)?
It is an attempt to step away from 'disabled'. It represents assistive / functional help. No different in connotation, I'd hope, than informative / instructional help.
Share:
Apologies for being a bit late jumping into this discussion but it only came to my attention after reading Jacks blog this morning. Anyway, here's my tuppence worth and sorry it's not more constructive! The helping hand icon isn't obvious and when we're on the subject of accessibility it should be obvious. To me it looks like a rabbit at first glance with two oddly place whiskers. It's also not that unlike the National Lottery logo so my preference would be for some more simplistic.
I do like the Apple icon, to me it says openess, perhaps too wide and suggests universality as Jack has already pointed out. Still, gets my vote.
Share:
At the moment the site I'm developing doesn't have an "accessibility" page, but I reckon it should have one. That explains how to rezise text and what accesskeys we have used for instance. They're the "standard" ones, but still.
Would be nice to have an icon together with the rss, atom, text-resize and language version icons. Not sure about the hand, it does remind me of the lottery. I've been leaning more towards a question mark or "I" for information. or "A" for accessability? Those resize ones usually have A-, A, A+, so maybe an "A" icon that links to a page which explains how to resize the text makes sense.
Share:
Although it's recognised around the world, the wheelchair symbol is an anachronism. It reflects a time when accessibility was mainly perceived to be about physical access, and I think that time and technology have both contributed to a shift away from that.
As a blind person, I feel no sense of identification with that symbol, other than by the fact of its convention. I'm afraid I haven't really understood the detail of Phil's symbol, but the concept of a helping hand seems like a step in the right direction.
Most people with disabilities need a helping hand from time to time. At the risk of ticking off several people, I think that we'd be foolish to suggest otherwise. The possibility that the idea may upset some people though can't be dismissed.
I must admit I like the sound of the Apple symbol. I gather it uses the blue circle of the existing wheelchair symbol, so goes some way to utilising accepted convention to promote a new icon. I like the idea of open arms. It seems to suggest inclusion and acceptance.
Whether it's culturally acceptable around the world, I'm afraid I don't know. Given Apple's global presence though, I' imagine it has a pretty good chance of being acceptable.
Sorry, long post. Came to this late and wanted to respond to lots of ideas.
Share:
Overall, my vote would be for the question mark for the reason I said before - I think it is understood as 'help'...
| JackP wrote: |
| Why separate out different types of help? Surely including accessibility information/options in with the normal help is effectively making the accessibility aspect more 'mainstream' rather than being sidelined into a little accessibility cul-de-sac that's a special little place for those brave disabled people ... ? |
So even if it isn't the preferred option on a wider basis (and I'd like to have some proper feedback from multiple sources before coming to any conclusions on this), the hand might still be useful in Phil's context.
Jack Pickard The Pickards Information Services| Blog | Twit
Share:
Hi Leonie and, as I see it's your first post, welcome to the forum!
Great contribution to an important topic. You'll have already realised that many of us agree with you about the current symbol; it is outdated and needs replacing.
I think that there are two main problems. The first is going to be one of recognition and the second, one of acceptance. We all know how some people are quick to embrace new ideas, whilst others seem to be engaged in reverse all of the time! A case for them of 'If it's not broken, why fix it?'.
With all of the input going into this topic, I am hopeful that we can all agree on the way forward...
Cheers!
Share: