I'm reposting this document as a better formatted version
(not all Microsoft Word-to-text conversions are equal!).

Regards,
Jamal

----------
 Avoiding the Mousetrap: An Evaluation of Keyboard-only Access to Windows

Copyright (c) Alan Cantor 1998. All rights reserved.

Alan Cantor, B.Ed., M.A.
President Cantor + Associates
Workplace Accommodation Consultants
32 Queensdale Avenue
Toronto, Ontario
M4J 1X9
Canada

Voice (416) 406-5098
Fax (416) 406-5498
acantor@interlog.com
http://www.interlog.com/~acantor

Abstract

This paper evaluates the usability of keyboard-only access to Windows 95.
It establishes requirements for Windows-compatible expanded keyboards;
determines whether keyboard shortcuts are usable in practice; highlights
barriers faced by people who cannot e asily use a mouse or other pointing
device; and recommends ways to improve the keyboard-only interface.

Background

Manipulating a mouse or other pointing device may be difficult or
inefficient for people who operate computers with a single finger, toe, or
stump, or use a head-stick, mouth-stick or similar appliance; have
mobility impairments that affect upper-body coo rdination, such as
cerebral palsy and dystonia; have mouse-induced repetitive strain injuries
(RSIs); have low- vision; and are blind. For these populations, computer
access is facilitated by keyboard-only techniques.

Three recent developments give rise to the hope that the Windows 95
environment is accessible without a mouse:

1. Microsoft incorporated hundreds of keyboard shortcuts into Windows 95
and NT. See, for example, the Microsoft Windows Keyboard Guide [2] for an
exhaustive list of keyboard conventions supported by the 95 and NT
operating systems and most Windows applic ations.

2. Microsoft encourages software developers to build programs that can be
operated by keyboard alone. The Microsoft Windows Guidelines for
Accessible Software Design [3] urges software authors to "[v]erify that
all features can be used without a mouse."

3. Windows 95's mouse emulation software, MouseKeys, transforms the
numeric keyboard into a virtual mouse. Mouse emulation software is
indispensable when using applications for which keyboard equivalents do
not exist. Greater speed and control are achieva ble by using MouseKeys
and StickyKeys together. [Footnote 1: For example, to select a columnar
block in Word for Windows 95, lock the Alt-key, lock the drag lock button
(keypad-0), and use the directional mouse keys to select text.]

Objective

Notwithstanding these developments, questions remain about the viability
of keyboard-only access to Windows 95. This paper explores three issues:

1. Is the keyboard-only interface compatible with expanded keyboards?
"Single-digit typists" -- individuals who type with a single finger, toe,
or stump, or who use a head-stick, mouth-stick or similar appliance --
often benefit from using extra-large or compact keyboards. See Cantor [1].
Three expanded keyboard systems were tested for compatibility with Windows
95's keyboard-only interface.

2. Is the keyboard-only interface usable? Windows is arguably the most
mouse-intensive computer environment ever devised. Function is highly
concentrated in the pointing device. The "shortcut menu," for example, is
activated by clicking the secondary mous e button on a screen object.
Toolbars, which are not easy to access by keyboard, are now ubiquitous.
Although keyboard equivalents for many mouse functions exist, the question
remains as to whether they are usable in practice, without having to rely
on mo use emulation software.

3. How efficiently and effectively can applications be used sans mouse
when software developers fail to provide a good keyboard-only interface?

Approach

This research was conducted between 1996 and 1998 while I provided
accommodation support services to people with disabilities. The clients
included:

*  An office worker with computer-induced RSIs, for whom mouse work was
painful.

*  Four adult students, one with dystonia, three with cerebral palsy, for
whom using a standard mouse or pointing device was difficult and slow.

*  An adult with cerebral palsy whose most reliable control site was his
left foot. He typed with his big toe.

Discussion

Access problems with expanded keyboards for single-digit typists

As potential buyers of expanded keyboard systems, the question of
"mouseless" access to Windows is especially relevant to single-digit
typists. Are commercially-available expanded keyboards compatible with
Windows 95's keyboard-only interface?

While developing accommodations for the client who typed with one toe, we
considered three expanded keyboard systems: the Intellitools IntelliKeys,
the TASH WinKing; and the Unicorn Model II keyboard/DARCI TOO Computer
Control Device.

Not all expanded keyboards are equal to the task of keyboard-only access.
We determined that the keyboard interface is fully functional only if (a)
the expanded keyboard has all 101 keys of a standard PC keyboard; (b) it
supports latched and locked modifi er keys, singly and in combination,
with all keys, including mouse keys; [Footnote 2: For example, to switch
between three (or more) tasks using the Alt + Tab shortcut, lock the
Alt-key. Without locking the Alt-key, the shortcut switches between two
tasks , only.] and (c) its proprietary sticky key and mouse emulation
software, if they exist, can be switched off. Access is compromised unless
all three criteria are met. [Footnote 3: Microsoft's sticky key and mouse
emulation software are more versatile and have superior features than the
comparable software built into the expanded keyboard systems we tested.]

Of the three keyboards, the IntelliKeys alone satisfied the criteria.
However, other factors -- relating to the size and spacing of the keys and
the client's seating posture -- compelled him to choose the Unicorn/ DARCI
TOO system. He liked the bigness of the Unicorn, and was willing to trade
a modicum of function for long-term physical comfort. With considerable
effort, we were able to create workarounds for most of its
incompatibilities with Windows 95. [Footnote 4: DARCI TOO does not support
secondary mouse clicks (keypad-minus), simultaneous left and right button
clicks (keypad-*), and locking modifier keys. Microsoft StickyKeys do work
-- albeit unpredictably -- in conjunction with DARCI TOO.]

There is no "perfect" expanded keyboard for single-digit computer work.
When helping a single-digit typist select a new keyboard, tradeoffs must
be made between productivity, technical features, health and safety
factors, and personal preferences. MouseKe ys vs. keyboard shortcuts

Keyboard-only access to Windows is always possible using MouseKeys.
However, not everybody can use MouseKeys, and the technique is cumbersome
at best. A simple drag-and- drop operation can use ten different keys and
take 30 or more keystrokes. Choosing an item from a pull-down menu is
easier, but still tedious.

Keyboard shortcuts, by contrast, are quick and positive. For example, to
Exit from any Windows application, press the three-key sequence "Alt,
spacebar, C." Keyboard shortcuts save time, energy and frustration. Using
MouseKeys, one of my clients needed 20 to 30 seconds to select an item
from a menu. Using keyboard shortcuts, she completed the same task in
under two seconds.

People who progress from MouseKeys to keyboard shortcuts see a dramatic
increase in their productivity. However, mastery of the keyboard interface
does not come easily, for reasons that will become clear.

Access problems associated with the Windows 95 operating system and
applications

Although Window 95's keyboard-only interface has many outstanding
features, [Footnote 5: An extremely useful feature is the ability to
assign global shortcuts, i.e., keyboard shortcuts that open applications,
folders and documents, and that work in any co ntext. See Snyder & Lowney
[3].] the goal of reliable access remains elusive. Some aspects of the
keyboard interface appear to be retrofits, and consequently, are poorly
integrated into the overall design of the operating system.

In addition, significant barriers stem from developers who ignore keyboard
interface design guidelines, such as the standards set out by Microsoft
[3], Vanderheiden & Lee [4], and others. Although keyboard-only access is
almost always possible, it is not particularly usable.

Paciello [5] defines product usability in terms of five factors: (a) how
easy it is to learn; (b) how easy it is to remember; (c) whether it
promotes productivity; (d) whether it reduces the chances of error; and
(e) user satisfaction. Access barriers ass ociated with the Windows 95
operating system and many Windows applications render the keyboard
interface less than usable.

The practical problems associated with using the keyboard-only interface
are of three kinds: important information that is hard to see, navigation
by keyboard that is overly complex, and operations that do not work
properly.

Visibility problems

Efficient use of the keyboard interface depends on the ability to
immediately spot the focus and pick out important information. For
keyboard-only users who can see, detecting information on the screen may
not be easy:

*  The focus indicator in dialog boxes is almost invisible. Dialog box
focus is shown by a faint dotted line around the perimeter of the object.
The focus indicator should be unambiguous and conspicuous.

*  Some dialog boxes are visually busy. The Word 97 "Open" dialog box, for
example, has 11 navigable areas and 12 buttons, making it hard to detect
important information at a glance, and awkward to move around quickly.

*  In some dialog boxes, fonts are inordinately small and underlined
access keys are hard to see. Dialog box text size does not adapt to system
metrics; boxes are laid out by the author, and the typeface and font size
are not affected by changing the Disp lay Properties in the Control Panel.
The Microsoft Windows Guidelines for Accessible Software Design recommends
that developers avoid hard coding font sizes smaller than 10 points, but
even this modest standard is often disregarded. Ironically, many adult s
who have 20-20 corrected vision report that 10-point typefaces, when
presented on a computer monitor, are barely legible.

*  The insertion point in word processors and text editors is hard to see.
People who have low-vision or who work at a distance from the monitor
(e.g., toe typists) need a larger and/or bolder insertion point, similar
to the modified system carets and mou se pointers that are available.

*  The Accessibility status window, which shows MouseKeys, StickyKeys and
FilterKeys states, is too small to provide useful information to anyone
with less than perfect vision. Furthermore, the StickyKey indicator does
not differentiate between latched an d locked states. Not knowing the
states of the Shift, Alt and Ctrl keys is a frequent source of error and
frustration.

Navigational complexity

Navigational complexity refers to difficulties moving around or performing
tasks using keyboard equivalents. The threshold of navigational complexity
is reached when an experienced user is compelled (or forced) to abandon
shortcut keys for a pointing devi ce to complete a task. Some specific
examples:

*  Many features cannot be accessed without pointing and clicking.
Paradoxically, a large version of the Accessibility status window
(described above) can be activated only by clicking the secondary mouse
button on the accessibility status indicator and c hoosing "Show Status
Window" from the menu.

*  In Word 7, some help screens ignore navigational keystrokes.

*  There are two standard methods to move focus between tabbed pages in a
dialog box: Ctrl + PgUp, Ctrl + PgDown and Ctrl + Tab, Shift + Ctrl + Tab.
In some contexts, the first method works; in others, the second; sometimes
both methods work; occasionally , neither method works. When the focus is
on a tab selector, a third method, involving the directional arrow keys,
must be used. What is needed is a single method for moving focus between
tabbed pages that always works.

*  Many useful keyboard shortcuts are too onerous to be practical. For
example, to move the focus from the current task to the desktop, press
Ctrl + Esc, Esc, Tab, Tab. To reach the menu to rearrange the desktop,
press: Ctrl + Esc, Esc, Tab, Shift + F10.  Both of these tasks can be done
easily using the two new Windows keys, but shortcuts based on these keys
are not available, at present, on the three expanded keyboards discussed
in this paper. Additional simple keyboard equivalents -- preferably ones
that do not involve the two Windows keys -- are needed.

*  The organization of certain menus complicates access for keyboard-only
users. For example, when an icon is selected in an open folder, the "File"
menu lists two items called "New," and two items that use "N" as an access
key.

Functional problems

Functional problems refer to access barriers that result from poorly
designed or implemented software. In other words, things do not work as
one might expect, which contributes to user frustration:

*  There is no tolerance for error when using keyboard-only techniques to
select an unavailable menu item. When a user chooses, for example, "Paste"
from the "Edit" menu before copying text to the clipboard, the "Edit" menu
closes. (When the unavailable i tem is clicked with the mouse, the menu
stays open.) The keyboard-only technique should exhibit the same tolerance
for error as the point-and-click method.

*  When activating the taskbar using keyboard shortcuts, Windows 95 gives
no visual indication that the taskbar has been reached.

*  Software manufacturers ignore keyboard interface standards. Recent
releases of WordPerfect and Eudora Light do not reserve Shift + F10 for
the shortcut menu, and have dialog boxes that do not close when the Esc
key is pressed.

*  The function of the Alt-key is inconsistent. It acts both as a sticky
key (e.g., during menu selection) and as a regular modifier key (e.g., the
Alt + F4 Exit shortcut). The inconsistency is an annoyance because
keyboard-only users often press the Alt- key inadvertently, which
transfers focus to the menu bar. The sticky property of the Alt-key should
be optional.

These problems (and others) create significant and needless obstacles for
people who demand mouseless access to Windows. The barriers are maddening
to the people I have taught keyboard-only techniques, and are completely
unnecessary: the principles of acc essible software design are widely
known.

With recent software upgrades, there have been incremental improvements in
keyboard-only access; but there have been setbacks as well. In Office 95,
the menu bar and the selected menu title appear as contrasting colours. In
Office 97, the menu bar is grey and the selected menu title appears as a
raised grey button. The lack of contrast has created a new access barrier
for keyboard-only users: now it is hard to tell when the menu bar has been
activated.

Conclusion

The keyboard-only interface of Windows 95 is basically accessible, but not
especially usable. Once mastered, the interface boosts productivity; but
on other measures of usability, the design fails: it is hard to learn and
remember, produces unnecessary er rors, and does not promote user
satisfaction. Of the six adults I have taught mouseless techniques, only
one continues to use them.

The mouseless interface could be much better. These measures should go far
to improving the keyboard-only interface of future versions of Windows:

*  Correct the problems identified in the previous sections.

*  Expand the set of universal Windows keyboard shortcuts to include
familiar shortcuts that are not, at present, fully supported, such as Esc
to cancel a dialog box and Ctrl + A to select all.

*  Urge software authors to create keyboard equivalents for
mouse-intensive tasks. Many functions that are typically controlled by
mouse can be controlled by keyboard. To illustrate this capability, I have
developed a set of Visual Basic macros that allow quick and precise
adjustments to kerning, leading (spacing), inter-paragraph spread, hanging
paragraph indent, and so on, in Word 97.

*  Strengthen the requirements for the "Designed for Windows NT and
Windows 95" logo so that software authors are obliged to incorporate
comprehensive keyboard controls into their products.

The difficulties of the keyboard-only interface are symptomatic of a
larger problem. Windows is a rich and complex computer environment. Its
organizational and operating characteristics have not matured to the point
where the environment is as "intuitive" as Microsoft's promotion materials
would have us believe. Many aspects of the overall design could be
improved by adhering to the cardinal Universal Design principle: consider
all intended users. Significant improvements to the interface are
achievable i f developers and manufacturers consult with people who demand
keyboard-only access. Such collaborations would result in applications
that are easier to learn, easier to remember, promote productivity, reduce
error, and increase user satisfaction.


References

[1] Cantor, Alan. An Evaluation of Keyboard-only Access to Windows for
"Single-Digit" Typists. In RESNA `97 Proceedings. Rehabilitation
Engineering and Assistive Devices Society of North America Annual Meeting,
June 20-24 1997. Pittsburgh, PA. An updated version appears at
http://www.interlog.com/~acantor.

[2] Snyder, Maryanne K. & Lowney, Gregory C. Microsoft Windows Keyboard
Guide. October 17, 1996.

[3] No author. The Microsoft (R) Windows (R) Guidelines for Accessible
Software Design: Creating Applications That Are Usable by People with
Disabilities. Redmond, WA.: Microsoft Corporation. May 7, 1997 Edition.

[4] Vanderheiden, G. C. & Lee, C. C. Considerations in the Design of
Computers and Operating Systems to Increase their Accessibility to Persons
with Disabilities (Version 4.2). Madison, WI.: Trace R&D Center. 1988.

[5] Paciello, Michael. Accessibility By Any Other Name Is ...Usability.
EIA/CEG "CE Network News." December 1993.

----------
End of Document

