scholarly journals QUANTITATIVE METRIC FOR RANKING WEB ACCESSIBILITY BARRIERS BASED ON THEIR SEVERITY

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hayfa Yousef Abuaddous ◽  
Mohd Zalisham Jali ◽  
Nurlida Basir
Keyword(s):  
User Experience ◽  
Web Accessibility ◽  
Assistive Technologies ◽  
Screen Readers ◽  
Wcag 2.0 ◽  
Accessibility Barriers ◽  
Web Developers

Web accessibility aims at providing disabled users with a barrierfree user experience so they can use and contribute. However, not all websites comply with WCAG 2.0 which results in Web accessibility barriers in websites. Thus, assistive technologies such as screen readers would not be able to interpret the presented contents on the monitor due to these barriers and this will contribute to making websites inaccessible to disabled users. This paper proposed an innovative metric that assigns measurable weight to each identified barrier based on its severity and impacts on the accessibility level, and then ranks the barriers accordingly. Following, Web developers can fix the highly ranked severe barriers instead of wasting time in studying and fixing less severe types of barriers that may rarely occur. An experiment was conducted to check the metric validity. We found the metric was valid and thereby we suggested the usage of the metric as a valid scientific measurement.  

Code in action: Closing the black box of WCAG 2.0, A Latourian reading of Web accessibility

First Monday ◽  
2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Kreps ◽  
Mhorag Goff
Keyword(s):  
Web Accessibility ◽  
Web Content ◽  
Wcag 2.0 ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Heterogeneous Nature ◽  
Version 2.0 ◽  
Accessibility Guidelines ◽  
Content Accessibility ◽  
Web Developers ◽  
The Web

The focus of much academic work on Web accessibility has been concerned with the lack of implementation of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. There seems, as yet, however, to have been little critical reflection on the Guidelines themselves — save perhaps some awareness of the heterogeneous nature of the Web, and the difficulties facing Web developers trying to ensure their work displays true to their intentions across a wide range of different browsers and devices, making use of continually evolving and contested code. Yet, as this paper highlights, the long drawn out process by which version 2.0 of the WCAG came into being hides many skeletons, including aspects of the process of developing standards that bear closer scrutiny, and reveal much when viewed through Latourian eyes. The findings of this paper suggest that the WCAG2.0 are almost irrelevant today — to the detriment of those for whom they were made — and that the process of creating them was at fault.

scholarly journals Comparing Web Accessibility Evaluation Tools and Evaluating the Accessibility of Webpages: Proposed Frameworks

Information ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdullah Alsaeedi
Keyword(s):  
Web Accessibility ◽  
Web Content ◽  
Evaluation Tools ◽  
Wcag 2.0 ◽  
Web Contents ◽  
Accessibility Evaluation ◽  
Accessibility Issues ◽  
Accessibility Guidelines ◽  
Content Accessibility ◽  
Web Developers

With the growth of e-services in the past two decades, the concept of web accessibility has been given attention to ensure that every individual can benefit from these services without any barriers. Web accessibility is considered one of the main factors that should be taken into consideration while developing webpages. Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (WCAG 2.0) have been developed to guide web developers to ensure that web contents are accessible for all users, especially disabled users. Many automatic tools have been developed to check the compliance of websites with accessibility guidelines such as WCAG 2.0 and to help web developers and content creators with designing webpages without barriers for disabled people. Despite the popularity of accessibility evaluation tools in practice, there is no systematic way to compare the performance of web accessibility evaluators. This paper first presents two novel frameworks. The first one is proposed to compare the performance of web accessibility evaluation tools in detecting web accessibility issues based on WCAG 2.0. The second framework is utilized to evaluate webpages in meeting these guidelines. Six homepages of Saudi universities were chosen as case studies to substantiate the concept of the proposed frameworks. Furthermore, two popular web accessibility evaluators, Wave and SiteImprove, are selected to compare their performance. The outcomes of studies conducted using the first proposed framework showed that SiteImprove outperformed WAVE. According to the outcomes of the studies conducted, we can conclude that web administrators would benefit from the first framework in selecting an appropriate tool based on its performance to evaluate their websites based on accessibility criteria and guidelines. Moreover, the findings of the studies conducted using the second proposed framework showed that the homepage of Taibah University is more accessible than the homepages of other Saudi universities. Based on the findings of this study, the second framework can be used by web administrators and developers to measure the accessibility of their websites. This paper also discusses the most common accessibility issues reported by WAVE and SiteImprove.

scholarly journals Access denied: Exploring web accessibility standards and their implications for users with cognitive impairments

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Mendonca
Keyword(s):  
Content Analysis ◽  
Qualitative Content Analysis ◽  
Cognitive Impairments ◽  
Web Accessibility ◽  
Major Research ◽  
Wcag 2.0 ◽  
Conceptual Organization ◽  
Sensory Impairments ◽  
Priority Designation ◽  
Web Developers

This Major Research Paper (MRP) explores the language and conceptual organization of the WCAG 2.0 Guidelines, a universal web accessibility document that aims to guide the development of accessible websites for users with sensory, motor and cognitive disabilities. This MRP attempts to bridge the gap between the study of user behaviours of individuals with cognitive impairments and the language and prioritization schema WCAG 2.0 uses to address accessibility. A structured literature review of contemporary usability studies involving users with cognitive impairments identifies web-relevant behaviours unique to these users and provides a rudimentary introduction to the online barriers they face. A qualitative content analysis reveals, in depth, how the language and conceptual organization of WCAG 2.0 frame cognitive impairments as less important than sensory impairments. Barriers for users with cognitive impairments are less frequently addressed, and when they are, they are often given a level AAA priority designation, the least essential priority according to the WCAG 2.0 Guidelines. Individual criteria are further analyzed in the Discussion, where the themes and results of the content analysis culminate in recommendations for web developers.

scholarly journals Making journals accessible front & back: examining open journal systems at CSU Northridge

2015 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurie Borchard ◽  
Michael Biondo ◽  
Stephen Kutay ◽  
David Morck ◽  
Andrew Philip Weiss
Keyword(s):  
Web Accessibility ◽  
Assistive Technologies ◽  
Web Content ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Section 508 ◽  
Wcag 2.0 ◽  
Open Access Journals ◽  
Test Instance ◽  
Accessibility Guidelines ◽  
Open Journal Systems

Purpose – This study aims to examine Public Knowledge Project (PKP) Open Journal Systems (OJS) for its overall web accessibility and compliance with the Federal Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility and Compliance Act, also known as Section 508. Design/methodology/approach – Twenty-one individual web pages in the CSUN test instance of PKP’s OJS version 2.4.0 used in three back-end journal development user roles were examined using three web-accessibility tools (WAVE, Fangs, Functional Accessibility Evaluator). Errors in accessibility were then logged and mapped to specific Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) criteria. Findings – In all, 202 accessibility errors were reported across the 21 OJS pages selected for testing. Because of this, the OJS cannot be efficiently utilized by assistive technologies and therefore does not pass the minimal level of acceptability as described in the WCAG 2.0. However, the authors found that the types of errors reported in this study could be simply and effectively remedied. Research limitations/implications – Further studies will need to corroborate, on a larger scale, the problems of accessibility found in the specific pages. Only three user roles were examined; other roles will need to be analyzed for their own problems with accessibility. Finally, although specific errors were noted, most can be easily fixed. Practical implications – There is an important need for accessible software design. In the case of CSUN, one of the campus partners will be better served by improving the web accessibility of the authors’ online open access journals. Originality/value – Although many studies and analyses of Section 508 compliance of front-facing web resources have been conducted, very few appear to address the back-end of such tools. This is the first to examine what problems in accessibility journal users with disabilities might encounter as OJS system administrators, journal managers or journal editors.

scholarly journals Access denied: Exploring web accessibility standards and their implications for users with cognitive impairments

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Mendonca
Keyword(s):  
Content Analysis ◽  
Qualitative Content Analysis ◽  
Cognitive Impairments ◽  
Web Accessibility ◽  
Major Research ◽  
Wcag 2.0 ◽  
Conceptual Organization ◽  
Sensory Impairments ◽  
Priority Designation ◽  
Web Developers

This Major Research Paper (MRP) explores the language and conceptual organization of the WCAG 2.0 Guidelines, a universal web accessibility document that aims to guide the development of accessible websites for users with sensory, motor and cognitive disabilities. This MRP attempts to bridge the gap between the study of user behaviours of individuals with cognitive impairments and the language and prioritization schema WCAG 2.0 uses to address accessibility. A structured literature review of contemporary usability studies involving users with cognitive impairments identifies web-relevant behaviours unique to these users and provides a rudimentary introduction to the online barriers they face. A qualitative content analysis reveals, in depth, how the language and conceptual organization of WCAG 2.0 frame cognitive impairments as less important than sensory impairments. Barriers for users with cognitive impairments are less frequently addressed, and when they are, they are often given a level AAA priority designation, the least essential priority according to the WCAG 2.0 Guidelines. Individual criteria are further analyzed in the Discussion, where the themes and results of the content analysis culminate in recommendations for web developers.

Diversity of Web accessibility in tourism: Evidence based on a literature review

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
Pedro Teixeira ◽  
Celeste Eusébio ◽  
Leonor Teixeira
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Systematic Literature Review ◽  
Web Accessibility ◽  
Tourism Industry ◽  
Assistive Technologies ◽  
Scientific Databases ◽  
Tourism Websites ◽  
Web Developers ◽  
Published Research ◽  
Automated Methods

BACKGROUND: In the tourism industry, people with disabilities (PwD) are frequently excluded from certain activities. The Internet is one of the most used information sources for planning tourism trips. However, the level of accessibility of information disseminated by the tourism industry through websites is still very low. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore the existence of diversity in Web accessibility in the tourism industry. METHODS: A systematic literature review method was used for the identification, selection, and evaluation of the published research on Web accessibility in the tourism industry. A set of 40 papers obtained from relevant scientific databases, and complemented with a snowballing effect, was synthesized and analyzed. RESULTS: Low levels of diversity of Web accessibility were found in the different tourism activities analyzed. The majority of studies published in this field are relatively recent and both manual and automated methods were employed. Web accessibility failures were mainly related to lack of connectivity with assistive technologies, complex layout, and navigation difficulties. CONCLUSION: The results obtained in this systematic literature review provide important contributions to increase knowledge of Web accessibility in the tourism industry. Moreover, practical and theoretical contributions can help Web developers creating more accessible tourism websites.

Comparing ten WCAG tools for accessibility evaluation of websites

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-23
Author(s):  
Shashank Kumar ◽  
Jeevitha Shree DV ◽  
Pradipta Biswas
Keyword(s):  
User Interaction ◽  
Web Accessibility ◽  
User Profile ◽  
Syntactic Analysis ◽  
Color Contrast ◽  
Careful Evaluation ◽  
Accessibility Issues ◽  
Web Developers ◽  
Compare And Contrast ◽  
Common User

BACKGROUND: Web accessibility is one of the most important aspects of building a website. It is important for web developers to ensure that their website is accessible according to WCAG standards for people with different range of abilities. There is plethora of tools for ensuring conformance to WCAG standards but not many studies compared performance of automatic WCAG tools. OBJECTIVE: This paper compares a set of ten WCAG tools and their results in terms of ease of comprehension and interpretation by web developers. We proposed a Common User Profile format to help personalize contents of website making it accessible to people with different range of abilities. METHODS: We selected ten WCAG tools from World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) to evaluate landing pages of two popular websites. For each webpage, we identified accessibility issues and recommended alternate suggestions to help developers improve accessibility. Further, we highlighted accessibility issues that cannot be captured only through conformance to WCAG tools; and proposed additional methods to evaluate accessibility through an Inclusive User Model. We then demonstrated how simulation of user interaction can capture usability and accessibility issues that are not detected through only syntactic analysis of websites’ content. Finally, we proposed a Common User Profile format that can be used to compare and contrast accessibility systems and services, and to simulate and personalize interaction for users with different range of abilities. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: After careful evaluation of two websites using the ten tools, we noted that, both websites lacked color contrast between background and foreground; lack of sign language alternatives; opening of pop-ups without proper warnings and so on. Further, results from comparative analysis of selected web accessibility tools noted that, there is no single tool that can be found ideal in all aspects. However, from our study, Utilitia Validator by Utilitia SP. z O.O was considered the most feasible tool. By rectifying and incorporating issues and alternate suggestions by simulation study and Common User Profile format respectively, developers can improve both websites making it accessible to maximum audience.

Web Accessibility of the Top Research-Intensive Universities in the UK

SAGE Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 215824402110566
Author(s):  
Sophia Alim
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Web Accessibility ◽  
The Body ◽  
Web Pages ◽  
Wcag 2.0 ◽  
Body Of Knowledge ◽  
Text Content ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Future Technologies ◽  
The University

Although the web accessibility of universities around the world is well documented, much remains unknown about this aspect of higher education institutions in the UK. Using three automated web accessibility tools (TAW, WAVE and EIII Page Checker), this study explores the accessibility of the homepages of 66 research-intensive universities with respect to the WCAG 2.0 checkpoints. The results show that the most common checkpoint violations involve the provision of text alternatives for non-text content, contrast errors and the need to increase the computability of webpages with future technologies and tools. The results show that there are variations between UK universities, and there is some evidence of consistent compliance amongst the university homepages. However, when evaluated against results from similar studies of web accessibility in other countries, these web pages perform well. Overall, this study adds to the body of knowledge on web accessibility in higher education in the UK.

scholarly journals Web Accessibility Barriers in Geographic Maps

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 80-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Calle-Jimenez Tania ◽  
Luján-Mora Sergio
Keyword(s):  
Web Accessibility ◽  
Accessibility Barriers

Web Accessibility Research and Practice

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-49
Author(s):  
Mona M. Alnahari ◽  
Joyram Chakraborty ◽  
Mona Mohamed
Keyword(s):  
Arabian Gulf ◽  
Web Accessibility ◽  
Gulf Region ◽  
Persons With Disabilities ◽  
Research And Practice ◽  
Wcag 2.0 ◽  
Arabian Gulf Region ◽  
The World ◽  
Accessibility Issues ◽  
Arabic Speaking

Web accessibility is the practice of having websites that are accessible to all people, including persons with disabilities. Several research studies have been done around the world to improve web accessibility. However, advances in Arabic web accessibility studies are limited. Research has indicated that a significant number of Arabic websites have accessibility issues, which becomes a restraint to people with disabilities from accessing and using the web. This research reviews current studies in web accessibility presented within the cultural background of several Arabic-speaking countries, particularly the Arabian Gulf region of Gulf Cooperation Council, and addresses services offered by the countries. The authors evaluate 54 websites in the Gulf region regarding accessibility issues. The results show that all websites do not satisfy WCAG 2.0 (AA). This paper highlights the deficiencies in Arabic web accessibility and provide some recommendations and suggestions for improvements.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document