In selected texts used in the technical and professional writing curriculum, students and teachers alike find general advice about implementing graphics and visual elements in documents and/or screen design. That is, these texts address issues of page layout and page design; they recommend general principles along these lines. For example, Paul Anderson's most recent edition of Technical Communication: A Reader-Centered Approach suggests four basic design principles: proximity of information and images on the page, alignment of information and images on the page, contrast and hierarchical arrangement of information and images on the page, and repetition or uniformity in the delivery of information and images on the page. Referring specifically to the design of screen-based text, i.e., web pages, Anderson devotes exactly one paragraph to the topic and informs readers that "the guidelines discussed here [those that apply to the design of the printed page] are just as valid for pages to be read online" (337). In a separate chapter titled "Communicating Electronically: E-mail and Web Sites," Anderson shockingly reveals to his readers what he sees as the differences between reading on-screen text versus print-based text. (Click here to read Anderson's comments on this distinction.) Furthermore, screen shots included in this chapter to demonstrate navigational aids and the location of menus, screen shots from the Roche Group (healthcare, research, and development corporation), are from a site that is hardly user friendly for those using assistive technologies. (Click here to view the site Anderson includes in his chapter. "Copy" the URL for the site's index and then Click here to visit Bobby at Watchfire.com and to run a scan of the site's accessibility status by "pasting" the address into the blank URL field.)
Our intent is not to be overly harsh or critical of Anderson's text, though there is much with which to take issue besides the absence of disability concerns. Indeed, Richard Johnson-Sheehan's new text, Technical Communication Today, is equally neglectful. John-Sheehan does, however, have in the index of this text an entry for "accessibility," a term he defines as "providing visual cues like headings, lists, and graphics to help readers quickly access important information." Perhaps the most notable feature in this definition is the reliance on visual cues. Indeed, this definition of accessibility is solely contingent on the visual and on sighted users. Mike Markel's Technical Communication: Situations and Strategies includes in its index entries for both "disabled persons" -- a section in the text that covers writing about people with disabilities rather than writing for people with disabilities -- and "accessibility." Like Johnson-Sheehan, Markel's approach to accessibility is rather sight-centric; however, his definition is more inclusive as it addresses use and usability more than anything else: "Accessibility refers to the ease with which readers can locate the information they seek. Most technical documents are made up of small, relatively independent sections. Some readers are interested in only one or two sections; others might want to read more. Because few people will pick up the document and start reading from the first page all the way through, your job is to make the various parts of the document accessible" (14). Whereas Markel refers exclusively to printed pages here, we find a similar approach to access and usability later in the text when he addresses limitations and the need to accommodate readers, albeit his primary advice for accommodating "limitations of your audience" addresses to low-end hardware and software as these variables affect the loading of graphics. None of the texts reviewed here address "ALT" or alternative text as a way to describe screen-based images.
Click here for a review of texts that more successfully address issues of access and design.