Update on the Feds Progress Towards an Accessible Web-Mapping Interface

As most people interested in reading this blog know, the driving force behind choosing my thesis topic was because it is of great importance at my place of employment.  Treasury Board, the agency in charge of enforcing CLF standards has been pushing for Web-Mapping applications to be either made accessible or taken down.  As my team has a web-mapping group of programmers, who are responsible for a large chunk of the web-mapping applications pushed out by Environment Canada nationally, we have a large stake in this.

So aside from working with Greg and UofT, I am also working with other federal departments to come up with a solution to this problem.  Agriculture Canada has done a lot of work in this area, and like us has addressed all accessibility issues except for obviously the main map image.  They have met with Treasury Board and have gotten a pass on some of their applications, as they are arguing that the map can be accessed through using the Mouse Keys function built into the operating system.

Now, although this isn’t actual accessibility, it has pleased treasury board.  EC seems to be the only group that is going as far as we are to address the accessibility of the image.  Our next step will have to be to make an appointment with treasury board. After I get back from Fredericton this will be next on my plate.  Meanwhile we have a government wiki where I will be posting tips and tricks about web-mapping accessibility in order to help out agencies that do not have developers dedicated to this task.

Testing out my study

I conducted a pseudo-study the other day to see how my idea for a research study would work out.  I need to show how people would describe a map to another person, as this is not something we usually need to do. Using 4 volunteers I had them work in pairs, where one person describes the map to the other.  I am bundling this as a game, as I would like to create an extensive knowledge base, and hopefully a game would encourage this more so than a questionnaire.  Basically, Player 1 gives hints while Player 2 guesses which map they are describing.  This game will be played online, but in the meantime I used a very low-level prototype (a booklet of photocopied maps)  in order to iron out kinks before I set forth developing the online game.

I used maps of all different extents and locations ranging from rural to urban.  Over each map I placed a thematic data layer, and also varied it’s distribution map to map (clustered, spread out etc.)  Player 1 had one map in front of them, while Player 2 had 3 maps to choose from, all with the same base layer, but with the thematic layer varied.  Each set of partners went through the 8 maps, and then switched roles and repeated the game again.

Here is a list of things I will change/add and then perform the test again:

• I included the same title on each map that was tested.  It was a very general title, and while the volunteers said it provided them with some context, it was very limited.  Next time I will vary the titles and try to make them more detailed.
• The game was too easy, although I could tell the players enjoyed it and wanted to win so I need to institute some features that will make it more challenging

• Enforce a time limit for giving hints and guessing
• Give players a word limit for their hints
• Include maps at different zoom levels so that people are less dependent on labels – less labels would make it harder to provide hints
  
• Switch maps totally after each round, as during this test I only changed their order but were still made up of the same maps
  
• Switch up partners after each round, the volunteers got to one another from the way they gave hints in the round before.
  
• Have levels that would increase in difficulty as the game progresses

I will add to my test study and grab a few coworkers when I get back into town to test it out.  Hopefully it will be a bit harder, and then I can compare the quality of descriptions that were given here.  Stay tuned.

What I imagine the interface for Player 1 would look like.

What I imagine the interface would look like for Player 2

Venturing up to the 3rd floor…

Tom Kralidis and I sat down today to talk in depth about my research.  Tom is in the Information Management division at EC whereas I am in Application development so our paths haven’t crossed much until now.  Our discussion really helped me get on track though as not only does he understand the complex workings of the federal government (!) but he was also a part-time masters student, working on Geospatial Web Services, and his advisor happened to be Fraser Taylor’s.

The main thing we discussed was the metadata available for each map’s dataset.  When I first started out on this topic, I thought all of the answers would lie in the metadata.  My course veered away from this for various reasons, as the path to research is not a straight and steady one.  But Tom and I went back to it, as he is the IM guy.  He was able to show me what is out there, and who is storing geospatial metadata really well.  Accompanying the metadata that is attached to the dataset as a whole, there is also metadata available for each record specifically.  I do not know the state of NPRI’s metadata right now, but I’m guessing it is pretty high-level if at all.  Over the next few days I’ll be exploring GeoConnections and tracking down our metadata people to see what the situation is.  And if it IS in the state I think it is, I’m just going to have to pretend it is working as it should in a perfect world…and go from there.  That’s the beauty of academia isn’t it?

I’m also going to get my hands on ESRI’s spatial analysis tools, to see how i can possibly leverage it.  More to come on that…

UofT’s Cartography Guru

I met with Byron Moldofsky on May 20th, who is the manager of the Cartography office at the university.  He was very helpful in pointing me to people that could help me in my research, as well as giving me his general comments.  He also gave me NPRI maps that his own team had already made, which I thought was a pretty funny coincidence, and my team appreciated them, they are now hanging in our GIS pod

Fraser Taylor seems to be the person to talk to, as he coined the term “Cybercartography”.  He is a Geography and Environmental professor at Carleton University.  We have touched base through email, and he has pointed me to some of his students who are working around the area of web-mapping accessibility.  One is interested in the policy side of accessibility which will be handy from an Environment Canada point of view.  We shall see what will develop.

I’ll be in Ottawa in June for work, so hopefully I can meet with Fraser and his students then.

Book Shelf

As I am about to return some books to the library, I thought I had better document some of the books I’ve gone over for future reference:

Introduction to Thematic Cartography Judith Tyner

Good definition of how thematic mapping differs from other types of maps, and which situations are best used for each type.

Purpose of thematic maps:

• to provide information on what and perhaps how much occurs at different places, that is, data storage
• to map the characteristics of a geographic phenomenon to reveal its spatial order and organization

This book also gave me a good description and outline on the process of Generalization in cartography.

• Selection
• Simplification
• Classifying or Grouping
• Symbolization

…as well as what is taken into consideration when a cartographer is faced with task of generalizing the data:

• Purpose
• Scale of Map
• Readers abilities
• Cartographer’s Equipment and Skills

Seeing Through Maps Kaiser and Wood

This is a pretty fun read and is a basic overall summary of maps.  It reads more like a workbook, with activities throughout.  I think it would be a good introductory book  for young adults interested in mapping and cartography, but it also worked for me (ha ha).  It has a good theoretical approach, and came across as very motivational concerning the field of mapping.

It hit home how important the purpose of the map is, and how it must constantly be kept in mind through it’s design.

Although a large part of the book was explaining different projections, and didn’t help me much, I found the rest useful.  It is also written with a sense of humour, which always help.

Describing a map:

“As with the truth, the subject of the map seems simple.  But when you try to put it into words, it turns out to be hard.  In fact, the map is not at all what it seems.”

“eyes and maps present selective visions, tailored to our needs.  The needs – the purposes – act as editors or fitters or lenses to let us hone in on what is important at the moment.”

Concerning generalization:

“To create a map is to abstract from the world those factors deemed important, and display them in a forum that allows them to be useful.” a map is rich in data – we want to display info that will be the most impactful to a reader – just as a map does – this all depends on the purpose.

Map Use and Analysis John Campbell

Can’t we all just get along?

I have a preference for the way accessible web-mapping is presented and I think I need to put it out there.  I have had this “argument” with other developers on my team (you know who you are), and while I understand their viewpoint, I am leaning toward the opposite camp.

Call me a dreamer, but I would like to work towards an interface that doesn’t separate the two streams of users that I am addressing here with my research, the visually impaired, and everyone else.  I think that to truly make the web accessible to all, then there should be no division.  I mean sure, you should have the ability to choose your preferences, and tailor your web experience in a way that best suits you, but I don’t think that it should be two totally separate applications.

I see the textual description as a complement to the visual map, an enhancement.  As a sighted user, I may also want to interact with the textual component, not just the visual map and vice versa.  May I remind you that visually impaired does not only include people who are blind.

But will this approach to design create an application that in the end, just frustrates all users?  This is a risk, and maybe the fact of the matter is that it would be better for all users to have the seperate streams.  I don’t technically know the answer, I just have a personal ideal solution..and it’s my research, I can conduct it how I want to, can’t I?  I will look into it to see if there has been any research done on this and keep you posted.  But in the meantime, you could put in your 2 cents…

mmm delicious

Here are my delicious tags…in case you are interested.

Tactile Maps

I received a comment today pointing me to Tactile Map Automated Production (TMAP) a web-based application for producing tactile maps.

This reminded me that I have not blogged about the articles I have read so far concerning tactile maps:

Navigating maps with little or no sight: An audio-tactile approach R. Dan Jacobson

This paper outlines the benefits of tactile maps, and the general purpose behind them.  It also outlines the shortcomings of basic tactile maps.  It is a good introduction to the use of tactile maps for the visually-impaired.

Creating Tactile Maps for the Blind using a GIS Jerry Clark, Deanna Durr Clark

This paper addresses the problem of orienting blind students to a school campus.  It proposes a system that uses GIS and a coordinate digitizer to create “tactilely-enhanced” paper maps. Conclusions I was able to take from this paper is that keeping it simple is important. Users would not be interested in every specific point on a map.  It also concluded that an overall site map was beneficial upon introduction, with underlying, more specific maps they can access if desired. This aligns with the approach I’m thinking of taking in my design. Customization was also deemed important.

BATS: The Blind Audio Tactile Mapping System Peter Parente Gary Bishop

This paper outlines an application created to allow students with visual impairments explore and understand spatial information.  It is useful to understand how these students learn the concepts of spatial information, such as compass direction, relative distance, perimeter etc.

Teaching visually impaired children to make distance judgements from a tactile map Simon Ungar, Mark Blades and Christopher Spencer

This paper researches the ability of children to make distance judgments based on the scale of a map.  It shows the value of educating visually-impaired children in reading maps.  They are able to make sense of the concepts and draw information from it.  This shows that although visually-impaired people cannot see the map, they can still benefit from its use.

Scrambled Tofu

Thanks to Greg, I now have a collaborator…or as I like to think of it, a new best friend.  Jon Pipitone is a Masters student working with Steve Easterbrook, who is interested in creating a Climate Change modelling application that is intuitive and interactive (did I get that right?). Hopefully we will be of some help to one another.

We met yesterday, and I thoroughly enjoyed being able to talk to someone about my Web-Mapping Accessibility topic for longer than 10 minutes before their eyes glazed over.  I now have many things to think about that are a little more well-formed in my mind than before.   Here are a few of the things I was able to take from the conversation:

• I’ve never actually discussed how this textual description will be presented.  It was pointed out that I seem to already be  settled on displaying the description in the longdesc tag.  This is what I have to do in order to satisfy accessibility standards, in its most basic form.  I see this as being much more than just a longdesc though, definitely more interactive.  So maybe I have to stop talking about the longdesc so much.  I see it displayed, just as a map is.  At first the most basic, general description is offered, and you are able to drill-down into the information depending on what aspect of the map data you are interested in.  The organization of course will be tricky as we are working with huge amounts of data, so I need to know my audience better….
• Creating detailed use cases would be a logical next step in order to get to know and understand what people are looking for when they come to a map.  These cases could then provide me with the basic structure of the description.  But do I use my current NPRI mapping application as the subject, or do I use a basic map, with land mass, water and streets, nothing more?
• I need to figure out my process.  I always thought I would start out by getting a clear understanding of the base map or at least a section of it such as the province of Ontario, and then gradually add the layers one by one, to get a clear understanding of how they could affect the description – Bottom-up approach.  But through the use cases and understanding the users of the current mapping-application I’m working on, NPRI would require me to start by looking at the NPRI data first and continue drilling-down into the map – Top-down approach.
• Jon kept asking why my description can’t just be a bunch of lat’s and long’s…which I just kept crying “It can’t, it just can’t!” hmmmm maybe I should come up with more eloquent reasoning.
• I also ran through my plea for a unified map, one that does NOT siphon users into two stream, therefore two separate interfaces, accessible and non-accessible.
• I see a possible user study in my future, based on the verbosity game I listed below.  I could present subjects with various images of a map and ask them to describe it.  Within these descriptions I would hopefully be able to pick out common keywords used. I’m enrolled in Steve Easterbrook’s course CSC2130 Empirical Research Methods, where I’ll get to explore this idea further.

Ok, now the next step is to coin some sort of nickname for Jon, because every best friend requires a nickname.

I was supposed to do my laundry…

…but am now addicted to Verbosity.  Thanks Jorge.

I was looking into the descriptive game peekaboom and found a collection of games from carnegie mellon www.gwap.com. By playing the games, the descriptive words used are stored so that images will be *properly* described for search enigines.  My favourite was Verbosity, which is comparable to the gameshow Password.  You are paired with an anonymous player, and have to guess the word from each others clues. I found myself getting very frustrated at the other players, when they gave me clues I didn’t get or when they couldn’t make a guess over my obviously intelligent hints! If it’s this hard to describe “bit” or “limb” how will I ever describe a map…*sigh*

I had some problems with the peekaboom games, maybe there just weren’t enough players online as you need a few in order to play.  I think it is their oldschool version of the gwap games though.  They explain the problem of the lack of meaningful description for images:

One of the major accessibility problems is the lack of descriptive captions for images. Visually impaired individuals commonly surf the Web using screen readers, programs that convert the text of a webpage into synthesized speech. Although screen readers are helpful, they cannot determine the contents of images on the Web that do not have descriptive captions — but the vast majority of images are not accompanied by proper captions and therefore are inaccessible to the blind. Today, it is the responsibility of Web designers to caption images. We want to take this responsibility off their hands.

The article Peekaboom: A Game for Locating Objects in Images Luis von Ahm, Ruoran Liu and Manuel Blum will be a good resource. Allowing the users to propose descriptions, add keywords etc to maps would allow for alot of the visual inferences that are missing from the data behind the map to be applied.