You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The feedback from our friends at the MIT Accessibiity office is:
"""
Networks, graphs, and to a lesser but still substantial extent trees, are very difficult to visualize via a speech interface (i.e. screen reader). I'm not sure how to approach this.
Since number of connections, and centrality seem to be important, you might create a table which can be sorted based on these numbers. It might have the node label in column 1 and a count of connections or centrality in column 2.
You could create a table such that the first column is a node, then all the rest of that row contain all nodes directly connected to it. You could combine these such that column 1 contained the node label, column 2 contained a connection count, and the rest of the columns contained node labels of those directly connected. Each directly connected node label could be a link to the row containing that node in column 1.
You may want to contact Mark [email protected]; he's their accessibility guru and he's extremely knowledgable (and sighted). He may very well have some more idea for you...
""
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The feedback from our friends at the MIT Accessibiity office is:
"""
Networks, graphs, and to a lesser but still substantial extent trees, are very difficult to visualize via a speech interface (i.e. screen reader). I'm not sure how to approach this.
Since number of connections, and centrality seem to be important, you might create a table which can be sorted based on these numbers. It might have the node label in column 1 and a count of connections or centrality in column 2.
You could create a table such that the first column is a node, then all the rest of that row contain all nodes directly connected to it. You could combine these such that column 1 contained the node label, column 2 contained a connection count, and the rest of the columns contained node labels of those directly connected. Each directly connected node label could be a link to the row containing that node in column 1.
You may want to contact Mark [email protected]; he's their accessibility guru and he's extremely knowledgable (and sighted). He may very well have some more idea for you...
""
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: