An understated feature in desktop Firefox is the option to suppress the text and background colors that content authors choose for us, and instead go with the plain old black on white with a smattering of blue and purple links. In other words, 1994.
Why is this feature great? Because it hands control back to the user and allows people with visual impairments to tweak things just enough to make the web readable.
Somebody once asked on the #accessibility IRC channel why they can’t turn off content colors in Firefox for Android. So it seemed like a good idea to re-introduce that option in the form of an extension. There are a few color related addons in AMO, but I just submitted another one, and you could get it here. This is what the toggle option looks like:
Since the color attribute was introduced, the web has evolved a lot. We really can’t go back to the, naive, monochrome days of the 90s. Many sites use background images and colors in novel ways, and use backgrounds to portray important information. Sometimes disabling page colors will really break things. So once you remove colors from AMO, you get:
As you can see, it isn’t perfect, but it does make the text more readable to some. Having a menu item that doesn’t take too much digging to find will hopfully help folks go back and forth between the two modes and gt the best out of both worlds.
Anyone who comes from a pita-rich country to North America knows that you really can’t get your hands on good pita here. I came across a recipe in Hebrew that is really good, and makes fantastic doughy pitas with nice pockets.
1 kg of white all-purpose flour
700 g warm water
2 tbsp salt
2 tbsp brown sugar
1 tbsp + 1 tsp yeast
3 tbsp olive oil
In a large bowl, sift in the flour and mix all the dry ingredients (salt, sugar, yeast) until it is all evenly distributed. Add the olive oil, and half the the warm water. Start mixing with a spoon, and add the rest of the water slowly.
Now it’s time to get dirty (if you haven’t gotten flower on everything already). With a wet hand, reach into the bowl, and knead the dough in a twisting fashion, as if you were screwing a light bulb. If the business gets sticky, re-wet your hand as many times as needed. Does your arm hurt yet? Good. Keep twist-kneading, and switch directions every once in a while. Do this for 10 minutes.
Set the bowl aside, and let the dough rise for an hour and a half until it doubles in size.
Put pizza stone in oven and preheat it to its max temperature, my oven goes to 550 degrees F. The dough, once risen should be very airy and wet. This is good! Spill it out to a floured work surface and get control over it with flour. Now use a knife to split the dough into 16 balls. Flatten each ball with a rolling pin to create flat circles.
Baking time! Each pita will need about 2 or 3 minutes, not more. If you are seeing any browning you are a few seconds late. You should see the pita puff up and get a pocket. I managed to bake two at a time, and have a huge basket filled with fresh pita in about 15 minutes.
There has been discussion recently if websites should have the ability to detect whether a visitor is using a screen reader. This was sparked by the most recent WebAIM survey that highlights a clear majority of users would indeed be comfortable divulging that information to sites.
This is not a new topic, there is a spec in the works that attempts to balance privacy, functionality and user experience. This is also a dilemma we have as implementers and have discussed this extensively in bug reports. Even my esteemed colleague Marco put down his thoughts on the topic.
I have mostly felt confusion about this question. Not about the privacy or usability concerns, but really about the semantics. I think the question “do you feel comfortable disclosing your assistive technology to the web” could be phrased in a dozen ways, each time exposing bias and assumptions about the web and computing.
The prevailing assumption is that the World Wide Web is a geo-spatial reality loosely based on the physical world. Just like a geographical site, a site on the Web resides in a specific locality. The user is a “visitor” to the site. The “site” metaphor runs very deep. When I was first shown the Web, in 1994 I remember visiting the Louvre, seeing the Mona Lisa and signing a guest book. In this world, the browser is a vehicle that takes you to distant and exotic locations. Their names suggested it: Internet Explorer, Netscape Navigator, Safari, Galeon, and the imperialistic Konquerer.
This paradigm runs deep, even though we use the Web in a very different way today, and a new mental model of the Web is prevailing.
When you check your mail on Gmail, or catch up on Twitter, you are using an application. Your browser is just a shell. In your mind, you are not virtually traveling to Silicon Valley to visit a site. You feel ownership over those applications. It is “my” twitter feed, that is “my” inbox. You will not sign a guest book. Just look at the outcry every time Facebook redesigns its timeline, or after Google does some visual refresh to its apps. Users get irate because they see this as an encroachment on their space. They were happy, and then some ambitious redesign is forcing them to get reacquainted with something they thought was theirs. That is why market-speak invented the “cloud”, which ambiguates the geography of websites and reinforces the perception that the user should stop worrying and love the data centers behind their daily life.
Depending how you see the web at any given moment may change how you view the question of assistive technology detection.
If you are applying for a loan online, you are virtually traveling to a loan office or bank. Whether you have a disability or not is none of their business, and if they take note of it while considering your application for a loan that would be a big problem (and probably illegal). In other words, you are traveling to a site. Just like you would put on a pair of pants or skirt before leaving the house, you expect your browser to be a trusty vehicle that will protect you from the dangers and exposure in the Wide World of the Web.
On the other hand, you may use Microsoft’s Office 365 every day for your job or studies. It really is just an office suite not unlike the one you used to install on your computer. In your mind, you are not traveling to Redmond to use it. It is just there, and they don’t want you to think about it any further. The local software you run has the capability to optimize itself for its environment and provide a better experience for screen reader users, and there is no reason why you would not expect that from your new “cloud office”.
But What About User Privacy?
The question of AT detection is really more about perceived privacy than actual privacy. If you had a smartphone in the last 5 years, you probably got frustrated with the mobile version of some website and downloaded the native version from the app store. Guess what? You just waived your privacy and disclosed any kind of AT usage to the app and, in turn, to the website you frequent. This whole “the Web is the platform” thing? It is a two way street. There is no such thing as an exclusively local app anymore, they are all web-enabled. When you install and run a “native” app, you can go back to that original mental model of the web and consider your actions as visiting a site. You may as well sign their guest book while you’re at it.
In fact, “local” apps today on iOS or Android may politely ask you to use your camera or access your address book, but profile your physical impairments? They don’t need special permission for that. If you installed it, they alreadyknow.
In that sense, the proposed IndieUI spec offers more privacy than is currently afforded on “native” platforms by explicitly asking the user whether to disclose that information.
I have no simple answers. Besides being an implementer, I don’t have enough of a stake in this. But I would like to emphasize a cliche that I hear over and over, and have finally embraced: “the Web is the platform”. The web is no longer an excursion and the browser is not a vehicle. If we truly aspire to make the web a first class platform, we need to provide the tools and capabilities that have been taken for granted on legacy platforms. But this time, we can do it better.
Having a current mozilla-central mirror on git has contributed to my mental health, and has generally allowed me to be a better human being and not drown in self pity and misery. So thank you Ehsan.
Luckily, the RelEng team has picked up the baton, and have a git mirror of their own running. So go clone it. Unfortunately the commits do not share the same SHA1 as Ehsan’s repo. So you can’t just switch the remote URI. Also, after you clone, you will need to migrate your branches over. There might be ways to do this in a bulk-ish way, but I only have one branch that I really care about, and I will keep the old clone around for a while if I need to pick something up from an obscure branch. So I did this off the top of my head:
[eitan@mozbox Mozilla]$ cd mozilla-central-old/
[eitan@mozbox mozilla-central-old]$ git checkout a11y
[eitan@mozbox mozilla-central-old]$ git format-patch master..a11
[eitan@mozbox mozilla-central-old]$ cd ../gecko-dev
[eitan@mozbox gecko-dev]$ git checkout -b a11y
[eitan@mozbox gecko-dev]$ git am ../mozilla-central-old/000*.patch
Applying: Bug 942991 - Updated virtual cursor navigation sounds.
Applying: Bug 942994 - Introduce clicked sound
Applying: supress error when trying to activate invalid accessibles.
Applying: hide visual cursor when vc is null
Applying: some cursor control tweaks
Applying: start of new dialog focus
Applying: Only blur focus if new pivot position is not focused.