[ntnm] Re: Fw: Electronic newspapers: some observations
- From: Janet Price <price.janet@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "ntnm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <ntnm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 01 May 2014 19:03:53 +0100
Sent from my iPad
> On 1 May 2014, at 18:35, Gareth Williams <edward.williams123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> Hi all
>
> I have just joined the list, and partly as a test to see if it is working,
> and also to stimulate discussion, I am forwarding a copy of some observations
> I have sent to RNIB.
>
> All the best
>
> Gareth
>
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Gareth Williams
> Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2014 1:15 PM
> To: RNIBSolutions@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Electronic newspapers: some observations
>
> Hello
>
> When the production of electronic newspapers moved from TNAUK to RNIB on 1
> April, I determined to make no comment of the "things will never be the same
> again" variety or, indeed, any other comment, for a month, so that
> production would have a chance to settle down. The month has now elapsed, so
> I would like to make a few observations.
>
> 1. On the whole, I feel the transfer has worked fairly smoothly. The website
> is uncluttered, and it is simple to download the paper of my choice. I read
> the Guardian regularly, using the Victor Reader Stream, and my comments are
> based on this paper alone. I have tried both the html and epub versions.
>
> 2. I greatly miss the facility to receive my paper by email and its later
> availability. Previously it arrived, almost without fail, just after
> midnight. I would then transfer it to the Stream before going to bed, and
> read much of it before getting up. It now seems to appear at about 2:30
> A.M., so I am deprived of this pleasure. The only way round this is to
> download to my iPhone, and the availability of the text on this device is
> the one big advantage of the transfer. Nevertheless, I find the text more
> navigable using the Stream, so would prefer earlier availability of the
> material.
>
> 3. My biggest complaint is the layout of the text. Two levels of headings
> are included, one for individual articles, the other for the different print
> pages. I fear this is due to a sighted interpretation of what the blind
> person requires. I am not in the least interested in what page the
> particular article is on. I would much prefer that this level of heading be
> used for the categorisation of the articles. So, for example, in the
> unlikely event that I want to go straight to the Obituaries, I can do so
> quickly by moving through this heading level. This was possible in the past,
> when I used to convert the .doc text to html using the SpeakOn software. In
> the event that I wish to discuss an article with a sighted friend, or vice
> versa, I am sure we will find the relevant piece without wasting a level of
> heading on moving from page to page.
>
> 4. The results pages of the sports section are never included. They were
> always there in the past, as was the diary of forthcoming sporting events on
> a Monday. The Guardian quiz is included on Saturdays but, annoyingly, not
> the answers.
>
> 5. There is marginally more garbled text in the new version.
>
> 6. It would be an improvement if the name of each newspaper included its
> date. I rarely read all I want to of the Saturday paper before the following
> Monday's arrives. This causes a confused numbering which could be avoided by
> inclusion of the date.
>
> 7. Would it not have made more sense for you to have consulted your users
> more than a fortnight before the transfer was to take place? You would then
> have had time to incorporate into the system any improvements suggested.
>
> I hope you consider my observations constructive, and look forward to
> receiving your response in due course.
>
> Gareth
>
Other related posts:
