A bookmaker's V&R...

[Hitch]

Alright, so...yes, yes, yes, this should be in the V&R forum, but, so what. I'd have to explain everything, for those good folks to get it, and you lads (and ladies) will "get it" right away.

There are reasons that a decade ago, you all knew me as a fun, lighthearted, warm, kind person(alright, yes, I'm slathering it on a bit) but now, I'm old, jaded and bitter. This email is one of the reasons, and all its brethren, that drive me to misogynistic tendencies, in the original meaning of the word...

An inquiry from someone yesterday, which said:

Spoiler:

What accessibility standards are you able to adhere to in your ePUB conversion?
We are looking for a minimum of WCAG 2.0.
Are you able to meet these and if so, how does it affect your pricing?

Me:

Whu? followed by:
followed by:


This is why I'm insane. This is the sort of thing that is turning me into the Ebeneezer Scrooge of Scrooges, lemme tell ya.

So, for those of you that WILL ask, my reply:

Spoiler:

With all due respect, WCAG 2.0 is for web documents—not eBooks. if you search the WCAG, there's not even a reference to ePUB fles or any other eBooks, and that's for a reason. There are standards that no eBookmaker can meet—no matter what—like, for example, "keyboard functionality." We don't control that—the device-maker does. So, that falls to Amazon, to Apple, to B&N and so on.

For me to be able to address those standards that an eBook can achieve, I have to know what environments the eBooks will be read upon, and every single device. Because every device has different capaiblities.

So—which WCAG 2.0 standards, exactly, are you trying to hit, that you feel eBooks can do, and secondly, upon what devices and in which environment will these ebooks be used?

Which, of course, was not my REAL, inner-dialogue reply. I'll refrain from that, because with my luck, that person will search on this standard and this bloody post will come up.

I mean...if you're gonna be an accessibility badass, don'tcha think you should at least READ the damned standards? And pay attention to the fact that they're for THE WEB, not eBooks, where things like "make it easier for users to hear or see the content" are ENTIRELY in the control of the device-and-firmware makers, ffs?

AGGGGGGHHHHH!!!!!!

Hitch

[Quoth]

Indeed.

Also even supposedly WCAG 2.0 standard Web sites can be using evil dark GUI techniques and have poor usability.

[Quoth]

"misogynistic tendencies"
Um, I think it's a human thing, not gender based. Gender, Ethnicity and whatever are no barrier to people ticking boxes.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by FrustratedReader

"misogynistic tendencies"
Um, I think it's a human thing, not gender based. Gender, Ethnicity and whatever are no barrier to people ticking boxes.

I agree, absolutely. I was referring to the Women's Rights movement which misappropriated misogyny to mean, "woman-hating" decades ago.

That's why I said, "original meaning of the word." I don't just hate men. I hate everybody, of all sizes, shapes, genders, ethnicities, sexual orientation and all that good jazz. I've become an EEO hater. :-) I suck, but I'm even-handed about it.

AND, yes, also--WCAG sounds good but in practice, they need to spend more time thinking about it. You're absolutely right in that I run across black-backgrounded sites that are allegedly "accessible" that I need my as seen on TeeVee magnifying specs to read, on TOP OF my glasses.

Hitch

[hobnail]

On the flip side there are virtually no web sites about html and/or css that say anything about epub, they're as scarce as tits on a duck. I have css-tricks in my rss feed but it's never anything to do with epub.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by hobnail

On the flip side there are virtually no web sites about html and/or css that say anything about epub, they're as scarce as tits on a duck. I have css-tricks in my rss feed but it's never anything to do with epub.

Yuuupperdoodle, that's exactly right. I just don't know WHAT he was thinking.

Hitch

[elibrarian]

As the man said in the original question, its all about accessibility (for people needing screenreaders and such to use ebooks).

You can read something about it here:

https://inclusivepublishing.org/tool...ty-guidelines/

where there are also links to the specs. (WCAG 2.0, or a subset is among the criteria.)

You might also want to consider KevinH's brilliant plugin for Sigil (Access-Aide) and Doitsus ACE-validation plugin.

Regards,

Kim

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by elibrarian

As the man said in the original question, its all about accessibility (for people needing screenreaders and such to use ebooks).

You can read something about it here:

https://inclusivepublishing.org/tool...ty-guidelines/

where there are also links to the specs. (WCAG 2.0, or a subset is among the criteria.)

You might also want to consider KevinH's brilliant plugin for Sigil (Access-Aide) and Doitsus ACE-validation plugin.

Regards,

Kim

Kim:

Thank you, I'm more than acquainted with accessiblity--with what CAN be done in eBooks. Which has almost NOTHING to do with WACG.

There is actually quite LITTLE that a bookmaker can do. We already do the primary aspects:

• Text should fit all screensizes (Yup);
• adjustable text font, color (sometimes) font size and line-spacing (sometimes). The "sometimes" have to do with the device/software reading it, not our ebooks.
• Options to skip footnotes, etc. when reading wtih text-to-speech--those have NOTHING to do with the ebook file and everything to do with the reader.
• work with different input methods--NOTHING to do with the ebookmaker.
• Contain image captions and text descriptions for charts and graphis. YUP.
• Videos should be captioned or accompanied by text transcript. Yes, but really? Tell Youtube that, before somebody climbs on some eBookmaker's back. I think Google can afford to implement that more quickly than I can.
• Readable on multiple platforms and devices, such as computers, mobile phones, tablets, refreshable braille (no idea) and digital book readers. YUP.
• Page numbers should match the print version of the same book.Mostly, nope.

Most of the biggest "needs" for accessibility have nothing to do with the eBooks and everything to do with the devices and readers. So, let's lecture those companies, shall we?

Hitch

[elibrarian]

Well, I'm not that much of an expert and won't start an argument, but those accessible epubs of yours, how do they fare if you run them through the ACE-checker?

Regards,

Kim

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by elibrarian

Well, I'm not that much of an expert and won't start an argument, but those accessible epubs of yours, how do they fare if you run them through the ACE-checker?

Regards,

Kim

(sigh).

Hitch

[Tex2002ans]

Originally Posted by Hitch

Spoiler:

What accessibility standards are you able to adhere to in your ePUB conversion?
We are looking for a minimum of WCAG 2.0.
Are you able to meet these and if so, how does it affect your pricing?

Well, I would probably just promote the parts of your workflow that do make books "as accessible as possible":

• Use very clean markup
• Take pride in marking things properly
  
  • Headings as <h1>, not <p class="heading">
    
  • <i>, not <span class="italics">
• Night Mode support
  
  • No black-on-black text
• Tables as <table>, not pictures of data
• Foreign letters as actual text, not as little images.
• Use proper lang + xml:lang
• Proper alt text
• [...]

Originally Posted by Hitch

I mean...if you're gonna be an accessibility badass, don'tcha think you should at least READ the damned standards? And pay attention to the fact that they're for THE WEB, not eBooks, where things like "make it easier for users to hear or see the content" are ENTIRELY in the control of the device-and-firmware makers, ffs?

Perhaps they heard the "Accessibility" buzzword, and know it's a good idea to create more accessible documents, but don't know some of the technical details behind it.

A few examples of talks:

• ebookcraft 2017 "Creating a Roadmap for Accessibility"
  
  • Talk given by MIT Press.
    
  • (I would recommend just starting the video at 18 mins+.)
    
  • They discuss WCAG 2.0 a tiny bit, but point towards EPUB Accessibility 1.0, which gives some extra ebook-specific stuff to aim for (and says to "must meet WCAG 2.0 Level A", but aim towards Level AA.)
• ebookcraft 2017 "Ebook Usability from Library's Perspective"
  
  • Accessibility discussed around 24 mins + 41 mins.
    
  • They also mention potential "legal requirements" which might aim for a WCAG level.
    
• ebookcraft 2019 "The Accessibility Supply Chain"
  
  • Explains some of the issues you might run across in books, plus discussing more of a business use-case on why things need to be designed Accessible in the first place.

So meh. I probably would've just given the bulleted list, then pointed to a few other resources and say you do your best to follow WCAG as much as possible without sacrificing compatibility with actual stores/devices.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by Tex2002ans

Well, I would probably just promote the parts of your workflow that do make books "as accessible as possible":

(snippage)

So meh. I probably would've just given the bulleted list, then pointed to a few other resources and say you do your best to follow WCAG as much as possible without sacrificing compatibility with actual stores/devices.

I've simply reached my limit on educating people who read something that they don't understand, "on the net" and then think that they should interrogate me about it. It's like the ones that challenge me, insisting that I "have to" give them ePUB3, because they KNOW that's the right format and if I try to give them ePUB2, they'll know that I'm giving them substandard goods. Riiiiiiight. (Especially if they're publishing via Lulu, RIGHT?) Or how they want "PDF3" or "Kimble" or any of the other 50 things I've heard, just in the last 3 months.

Hitch

[Quoth]

Epub3 IMO isn't a later replacement for epub2, it's a different thing really for "interactive" titles on LCD/OLED.
POD needs a basic PDF, not any ebook format.

The only accessibility things that an ebook creator can do:
1) Flowing layout, never fixed layout.
2) No background
3) All body text black
4) Larger text for headings, but not too large
5) Check it's all fine on a monochrome screen with only 6 inbetween greys
6) No image based text, all text inc initial paragraph characters.
7) Possibly no drop or enlarged caps at a paragraph start, may look pretty but reduces compatibility and readability (even on paper).
8) Body text using a serif font. Chose any publisher font to ensure works on 150 dpi eink. Far the best for Dyslexics, no clear proof Open Dyslexic font helps. Avoid large blocks of bold or italic. Avoid too small text for notes etc.
9) Only footnotes in reference works, try an inline right justified paragraph in sans rather than linked footnotes.
10) Clarity is more important than pretty.
11) No animation or video.
12) No page numbers except as right margin "notes" as actual pages in a copy of a reference work that's only ever one paper layout (e.g. Hebrew Bible)

WCAG is irrelevant for books and ebooks. It's not even very good for web sites.
eBooks are ALREADY more accessible than printed paper due to user selected margins, font size, flow and ability for text to speech on some ereaders.
Almost all accessibility issues are to do with the ereader gadget & its software, unless the book is really bad.
Really bad evil stuff in an ebook:
A background (image or colour)
Non-black body text.
Text as images, but see exception below
Headings etc too large or colours / shade unreadible on eink
Animation/Video
Fixed layout

Only use small snippets of text as image and ONLY if the font/alphabet isn't likely to be supported, consider latin/roman english speaker transliteration in brackets after it. Most users of Latin/Roman font/alphabet can't read other systems even to pronounce it. Obviously if the book is Russian, Greek, Japanese, Arabic, Hebrew this doesn't apply, though Amazon STUPIDLY had maybe only Latin/Roman and some Greek letters originally on the Kindle, even though the underlying Linux supported most lanaguages years earlier. It had worse language support than 1988 DOS.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by Tex2002ans

• Tables as <table>, not pictures of data Yes, text but not Tables because they work poorly or not at all
• Foreign letters as actual text, not as little images. Sadly doesn't work on many ereaders, though it could have years before release
• Use proper lang + xml:lang Sadly doesn't work on many ereaders, though it could have years before release
• Proper alt text Sadly doesn't work on many ereaders, though it could have years before release. You need a text caption under the image if it's important for Text to Speech

Perhaps they heard the "Accessibility" buzzword, and know it's a good idea to create more accessible documents, but don't know some of the technical details behind it.
But understand NOTHING about it

A few examples of talks:
Snipped, mostly a waste of time.

So meh. I probably would've just given the bulleted list, then pointed to a few other resources and say you do your best to follow WCAG as much as possible without sacrificing compatibility with actual stores/devices.
Misses the point

Comments in Bold

I test on a 5" phone, 6" phone, 5" ereader, Kindle Keyboard, PW3, Kobos, Nook ST, Binatone Readme Colour, if in doubt.
Beta readers use PW3 or phones. Proofing done on a Kobo.

[Quoth]

Footnote (I always get them a bit mixed up).

misandry: Hating men or boys
misogyny: Hating women or girls
misanthropy: Hating all humans, without discrimination.

Arguing with people that seem to hold irrational viewpoints does tend to turn you into a misanthropist if you are not careful.
1) You might be wrong
2) Even if you are right, sometimes "winning" or trying too hard to "win" loses a friend or the "war". No-one likes a Clever Dick, least of all one that's right.
3) It's acceptable to be convinced someone is wrong and even on occasion mention it. It's not acceptable to hate someone because they have a different opinion or worldview even if you are convinced it's wrong and toxic.

But still, it's hard.