Perfect, Audrey!  You added exactly what was missing in my letter. (I
didn't want it to get too long--and I was getting tired.) 

And Ellen--thanks for your supporting comments!

Axel 


-----Original Message-----
From: Audrey J. Gorman [mailto:[log in to unmask]] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 1:53 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: virtual reference and accessibility of services to
all--open letter

Axel,

Excellent! I've added my voice to yours in addressing the College of
DuPage
and Richard Dougherty, as follows:

Dear collleagues:

Virtual reference is indeed a topic of vital interest to the profession
and
should be to all of us who call ourselves professional librarians. For
that
reason, I want to add my voice to that of Axel Schmetzke in speaking out
for the inclusion of information on accessibility in this teleconference
and in subsequent discussions. As Mr. Schmetzke points out, this
information and its implementation in libraries is crucial to the
intellectual participation of people with disabilities. But the need
goes
far beyond that subset of humanity, large though it is.

Accessibility is really about better customer service for all. Yes, it's
essential for people with disabilities. From a business and service
perspective, it is also useful for expanding a customer base. As a
marketing bonus, it truly makes life better for all. Here are two common
examples of this principle:

Curb cuts: Designed with people with mobility disabilities in mind - not
even the whole range of people with disabilities. Modified with textured
surfaces to assist people who are blind or visually impaired. Used by
parents with strollers, travelers with rolling luggage, shoppers with
grocery carts, and, yes, kids with skateboards and scooters, to name a
few.
Would any of us want curb cuts restricted to use by people with
disabilities?

Media captioning: (And this one addresses intellectual access) Created
for
people who are deaf or hearing impaired. Helpful for people with
auditory
processing difficulties. Used most extensively in bars, especially loud
sports bars, and by people who want to watch television in bed and not
disturb their partner.

Please let me know if I can be of assistance in adding information on
accessibility issues into the lively discourse on virtual reference.

Audrey J. Gorman
Access for All
Naperville, IL, USA
[log in to unmask]
Phone: 630-717-7336
Mobile: 630-661-9062

Member
Education and Outreach Work Group
Web Accessibility Initiative
World Wide Web Consortium


-----Original Message-----
From:   Schmetzke, Axel [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
Sent:   Monday, February 11, 2002 8:40 PM
To:     [log in to unmask]
Subject:        virtual reference and accessibility of services to
all--open
letter

Open letter to Richard M. Dougherty, host of a recent teleconference on
Virtual Reference Services offered through the College of DuPage. Part
One of this teleconference took place on Feb. 8.  Part Two is scheduled
for April 19. Information about this conference is available at
http://www.cod.edu/teleconf/virtual/index.htm.

Dear Sir,

I have followed your program on Virtual Reference Services with much
interest, as I did with the numerous other library teleconferences
provided by the College of DuPage. This series of teleconferences is a
great means for professional development, and while I do not always
agree with the positions taken by the guest experts, I leave these
conferences with much to think about.

I would like to make one critical comment with regard to the coverage of
the virtual reference services theme during the teleconference: the lack
of consideration for the needs of people with disabilities.

As was pointed out by the panel members, the "virtualization" of
reference services is an attempt to recreate online what has been in
existence physically for many decades. With the passing of Section 504
of the Rehabilitation Act and the American with Disabilities Act, much
effort has been directed towards re-designing physical space so that it
becomes accessible to people with disabilities. It is imperative that
the same effort is made with regard to the creation of virtual space. As
a new environment is created online, we must ensure that the needs of
all potential beneficiaries are met. Unfortunately, no such concern was
expressed by any of the experts. Following the wide-spread practice of
judging the merits of new online resources without considering the needs
of all potential users,  accessibility for people with disabilities was
not even included on the list of "additional concerns," which was
briefly discussed during the program. The one item that came closest,
concern for the "clientele," does not capture this issue. No matter who
the users may be-young students, old students, community members
etc.-services must not exclude by design, or by lack of consideration
during the design, users with disabilities.

It is obvious that web-based virtual reference services, with their
emphasis on a visual mode of communication, fully meet the needs of
people with hearing impairments. But what about those with visual
impairments, or those who have difficulty manipulating a mouse? Can
current virtual reference systems, including the one demonstrated during
the video conference, be used by people relying on alternative
keystrokes to navigate the screen? Is the chat feature, and the search
screen that the librarian pushes onto users' monitor, accessible to
blind users who employ screen reading software?

In a recent article on the accessibility of Online Chat Programs
(www.webaim.org/articles/chats), Jared Smith concludes that, at the
moment, "few are fully accessible to those with disabilities." Most chat
interfaces, he further explains (rather optimistically, I believe),
"could easily be made accessible with a few modifications and design
changes."  If the author is correct, who, I wonder, is going to make
these design changes if the leading experts discussing this technology
are not bringing up the issue? Software manufacturers will not bother
with it unless libraries explicitly demand it. And if Jared's Smith
optimism turns out to be far stretched (a distinct possibility), must we
not also ask which traditional service systems should be left in place
as alternative means for those who cannot take advantage of chat-based
technology?

As was pointed out during the conference, about a thousand libraries
have implemented chat-based virtual reference service systems during the
past year or two-inaccessible as they are likely to be at this point in
time. Let us make sure that the next thousand libraries insist on an
inclusive solution-before they rush out and purchase non-inclusive
software packages and while they, as consumers, still hold the financial
power over the companies which market them.

I would appreciate if you would share my comment with your guest
panelists. Perhaps it would be possible to address this issue, for a
minute or two, during the second part of the program scheduled for April
19.

Sincerely,

Axel Schmetzke, Ph.D.
Associate Professor & Moderator of AXSLIB-L
Library
University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point
900 Reserve
Stevens Point, WI 54481
[log in to unmask]
Tel: 715-346-4658




 << File: ATT00000.html >>