Comments on: Hiding Text But Not From Screen Readers http://blog.rd2inc.com/archives/2005/01/07/hiding-text-but-not-from-screen-readers/ News from the Creative Front Thu, 18 Feb 2010 05:30:25 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Peter http://blog.rd2inc.com/archives/2005/01/07/hiding-text-but-not-from-screen-readers/comment-page-1/#comment-149 Peter Tue, 01 Feb 2005 11:54:26 +0000 http://blog.rd2inc.com/archives/2005/01/07/hiding-text-but-not-from-screen-readers/#comment-149 <!-- spamk : KARMA: -1 --> <!-- spamk : Treatment: purgatory --> Thank you for the kind words about Fangs. The Standards-schmandards guy's name is Peter.

Thank you for the kind words about Fangs. The Standards-schmandards guy’s name is Peter.

]]> By: Mark http://blog.rd2inc.com/archives/2005/01/07/hiding-text-but-not-from-screen-readers/comment-page-1/#comment-114 Mark Sun, 09 Jan 2005 21:10:49 +0000 http://blog.rd2inc.com/archives/2005/01/07/hiding-text-but-not-from-screen-readers/#comment-114 <!-- spamk : KARMA: -1 --> <!-- spamk : Treatment: captcha --> <!-- spamk : Captcha expired, lowering karma and scaling again... --> <!-- spamk : KARMA: -3 --> <!-- spamk : Treatment: purgatory --> And it even works in IE5/Mac. Thanks for bringing this up. My projects will run much smoother now!



And it even works in IE5/Mac. Thanks for bringing this up. My projects will run much smoother now!

]]> By: Mike Rundle http://blog.rd2inc.com/archives/2005/01/07/hiding-text-but-not-from-screen-readers/comment-page-1/#comment-104 Mike Rundle Fri, 07 Jan 2005 22:31:29 +0000 http://blog.rd2inc.com/archives/2005/01/07/hiding-text-but-not-from-screen-readers/#comment-104 <!-- spamk : CAPTCHA:sent-1-times:1105140693 --> <!-- spamk : KARMA: -1 --> <!-- spamk : Treatment: captcha --> Eris showed me this post, and I have to say it's an interesting technique. I actually came up with a similar version a few years back <a href="http://phark.typepad.com/phark/2003/08/accessible_imag.html">on my weblog</a> that is pretty much the <em>de facto</em> image replacement method by the majority of web designers. My method is easier to implement because it doesn't rely on the parent element being absolutely or relatively positioned. Also, the entire goal behind image replacement is to have your element's background image still visible for sighted viewers, with the text being moved away as to not impede the visual experience whilst still being read by the screenreader. So if you wish to <code>float</code> the "Skip Navigation" links or image, it's advantageous to use my method for it doesn't limit your presentation choices. When you lament the fact that Jaws doesn't read <code>display: none;</code> text, that is because it is trying to give disabled users the user experience which closest emulates the sighted viewers experience, therefore, it reads and understands the CSS which makes certain elements visible or not. I don't feel this is a downfall or bug in the software, but rather quite the opposite. I'd rather have disabled users "see" the site for exactly how it is -- CSS and all -- rather than have a dumbed down version of it read.


Eris showed me this post, and I have to say it’s an interesting technique. I actually came up with a similar version a few years back on my weblog that is pretty much the de facto image replacement method by the majority of web designers.

My method is easier to implement because it doesn’t rely on the parent element being absolutely or relatively positioned. Also, the entire goal behind image replacement is to have your element’s background image still visible for sighted viewers, with the text being moved away as to not impede the visual experience whilst still being read by the screenreader. So if you wish to float the “Skip Navigation” links or image, it’s advantageous to use my method for it doesn’t limit your presentation choices.

When you lament the fact that Jaws doesn’t read display: none; text, that is because it is trying to give disabled users the user experience which closest emulates the sighted viewers experience, therefore, it reads and understands the CSS which makes certain elements visible or not. I don’t feel this is a downfall or bug in the software, but rather quite the opposite. I’d rather have disabled users “see” the site for exactly how it is — CSS and all — rather than have a dumbed down version of it read.

]]>