1. BrailleType
Unleashing Braille over Touch
Screen Mobile Phones

3. Touch Interfaces

4. pleasant

7. Tactile feedback
loss of tactile
feedback

8. Loss of physical stability

9. Difficult to select targets

15. Complex interactions

16. Familiar and simple.

17. BRAILLETYPE

29. Less and larger targets

30. Familar layout

31. Simple structured Interaction

34. Speed and
Timeouts

35. User Evaluation

38. 15 blind users

39. 24 to 68
years old

40. All but two
text regularly

41. Only one had
previous
experience
with touch
screens
mobiles

42. Practice phase
10 to 15 minutes
Two users were
not able to write
with QWERTY
(VoiceOver)

43. Erase was
unavailable

44. 4.0
BrailleType
3.5
VoiceOver
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Participants

45. VoiceOver
BrailleType
2.11 1.45

46. 45.0
BrailleType
40.0
VoiceOver
35.0
30.0
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Participants

47. VoiceOver
BrailleType
14.1 8.9

48. Easy to Quickly write Would use this
Easy to use. *
comprehend. * text. system.
BrailleType 5 (0) 5 (1) 3 (1) 3 (2)
VoiceOver 4 (2) 4 (2) 4 (3) 3 (1)
(Median, Inter-quartile Range)

49. BrailleType simpler
albeit slower
Users prefer simpler to
faster
Several close targets and
Split-tapping were the main
error causes

50. The Future
BrailleTab
Long term study

52. BrailleType
Unleashing Braille over Touch
Screen Mobile Phones
Hugo Nicolau
hman@vimmi.inesc-id.pt

53. Extras

55. NAVTAP AND BRAILLETAP: NON-VISUAL TEXTING INTERFACES
Tiago Guerreiro, Paulo Lagoá, Pedro Santana, Daniel Gonçalves, Joaquim Jorge
RESNA 2008