Forcing standardization or accommodating diversity?: a framework for applying the WCAG in the real world

ABSTRACT

Since 1999 the W3C's Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) have provided a solid basis for implementation of accessible Web design. However it is argued that in the context of evaluation and policymaking, inappropriate reference to the WCAG may lead to serious practical difficulties in implementation and monitoring of an effective accessibility policy. There is a pressing need for a framework that guides appropriate application of the WCAG in a holistic way, taking into account the diversity -- or homogeneity -- of factors such as context of use, audience and audience capability, and access environment. In particular, the current promotion of W3C technologies at the expense of widely used and accessible proprietary technologies may be problematic, as is the apparent reliance of the WCAG on compliant browsing technology.In this paper, a holistic application of the WCAG is proposed by the authors, whereby the context of the Web resource in question and other factors surrounding its use are used to shape an approach to accessible design. Its potential application in a real world environment is discussed.

REFERENCES

• 1: 1998 Amendment to Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act Retrieved March 15 2005 from Section 508.gov web site http://www.section508.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Content &ID=14
• 2: Allerdale Borough Council: Accessibility. Retrieved March 10, 2005, from Allerdale Borough Council Web site: http://www.allerdale.gov.uk/main.asp?page=166
• 3: Coyne, K. and Nielsen, J. Beyond ALT text: making the web easy to use for users with disabilities. Fremont, CA: Nielsen Norman Group 2001.
• 4: Disability Rights Commission. Formal Investigation report: web accessibility. Retrieved March 10, 2005, from DRC Web site: http://www.drc-gb.org/publicationsandreports/report.asp
• 5: HTML Writers Guild. HTML Writers Guild Web Accessibility Standards. Retrieved March 10, 2005, from Web site: http://www.hwq.org/opcenter/policy/access.htm
• 6: IMS Global Learning Consortium. Guidelines for Developing Accessible Learning Applications, version 1.0. Retrieved March 10 2005 from NCAM Web site http://ncam.wgbh.org/salt/guidelines/
• 7: Isolani. Sitemorse gets nasty, accessibility is the victim. Retrieved March 16 2005 from http://www.isolani.co.uk/blog/access/SiteMorseGetsNastyA ccessibilityIsTheVictim
• 8: Kelly, B. Accessibility Survey of UK University Entry Points, June 2004. Retrieved March 10, 2005, from UKOLN Web site: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/web-focus/events/workshops/webmaster-2004/talks/phipps-kelly/survey/
• 9: Kelly, B. An Accessibility Analysis Of UK University Entry Points. Ariadne issue 33, Sept 2002. Retrieved March 10, 2005 from http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue33/web-watch/
• 10: Kelly, B. Institutional Web Management Workshop 2003: Accessibility Questionnaire. Retrieved March 10, 2005, from UKOLN Web site: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/web-focus/events/workshops/webmaster-2003/accessibility-questionnaire/
• 11: Kelly, B, Dunning, A, Guy, M and Phipps, L. Ideology Or Pragmatism? Open Standards And Cultural Heritage Web Sites. ichim03 Proceedings (CDROM). Retrieved March 10 2005, from: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/qa-focus/documents/papers/ichim03/
• 12: Kelly, B., Phipps, L. and Swift, E. Developing A Holistic Approach For E-Learning Accessibility. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 2004, Vol. 30, Issue 3. Retrieved March 10, 2005, from: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/web-focus/papers/cjtl-2004/
• 13: Koyani, S. J., Bailey, R. W., Nall, J. R., Allison, S., Mulligan, C., Bailey, K. and Tolson, M. Research-based Web design and usability guidelines. Retrieved March 10, 2005, from Usability.gov Web site: http://www.usability.gov/guidelines/guidelines_notice.html
• 14: National Disability Authority of Ireland. Accessibility Guidelines for Web. Retrieved March 10, 2005, from NDA Web site: http://accessit.nda.ie/technologyindex_1.html
• 15: Nielsen J. Why you only need to Test with 5 Users. Alertbox March 2000. Retrieved 16 March from http://www.useit.-com/alertbox/20000319.html
• 16: Parlamento Italiano - Disposizioni per favorire l'accesso dei soggetti disabili agli strumenti informatici. Retrieved March 15 2005 from http://www.camera.it/parlam/leggi/040041.htm (Unofficial English translation retrieved March 15 from http://www.pubbliaccesso.it/normative/law_20040109_n4.htm)
• 17: Petrie, H., King, N. and Hamilton, F. Accessibility of Museum, Library and Archive Web Sites: the MLA audit. London: Council for Museums, Libraries and Archives. 2005.
• 18: Petrie, H., King, N., Hamilton, F. and Weisen, M. The accessibility of museum websites: results from an English investigation and international comparison. Proceedings of HCI International 2005. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. In press.
• 19: Regan B. Web Accessibility and Design: A Failure of the Imagination. Conference Proceedings - Designing for the 21st century III, December 7--12 2004, Rio de Janeiro. Retrieved March 15 2005 from http://www.designfor21st.org/proceedings/proceedings/plenary_regan.html
• 20: Schmetzke, A. Web Accessibility Survey Site, Retrieved March 10, 2005, from University of Wisconsin Web site: http://library.uwsp.edu/aschmetz/Accessible/websurveys.htm
• 21: Section 508 Standards. Retrieved March 15 2005 from Section 508.gov Web site: http://www.section508.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Content &ID=12
• 22: Sitemorse. Confusion Reigns Over Website Accessibility Compliance. Retrieved March 16 2005 from http://www.business2www.com/news.html?id=1217547344
• 23: Sloan, M. Web Accessibility and the DDA. In: Paliwala, A. and Moreton, J (eds) The Journal of Information, Law and Technology (JILT) 2001 (2). Retrieved March 10 from http://elj.warwick.ac.uk/jilt/01-2/sloan.html
• 24: Thatcher, J. Prioritizing Web Accessibility Evaluation Data. Proceedings of CSUN 2004:
• 25: Theofanos M. and Redish J. Guidelines for Accessible and Usable Web Sites: Observing Users Who Work With Screen Readers. Retrieved March 16 2005 from http://redish.net/content/papers/interactions.html
• 26: W3C. Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines 1.0. February 2000. Retrieved March 10, 2005 from W3C site: http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-AUTOOLS/
• 27: W3C. User Agent Accessibility Guidelines 1.0. December 2002. Retrieved March 10, 2005 from W3C site: http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-USERAGENT/
• 28: W3C. Web Accessibility Initiative Glossary. Retrieved March 10, 2005, from Web site: http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/WAI-WEBCONTENT-19990505/#glossary
• 29: W3C. Web Accessibility Initiative Statement on Web Access Report from UK Disability Rights Commission. Retrieved March 10, 2005, from W3C Web site: http://www.w3.org/2004/04/wai-drc-statement.html
• 30: W3C. Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0. May 1999. Retrieved March 10, 2005 from W3C site: http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/
• 31: W3C. Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0. November 2004. Retrieved March 10, 2005, from W3C Web site: http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/
• 32: Watchfire. Welcome to Bobby Worldwide. Retrieved March 10, 2005 from Watchfire site: http://bobby.watchfire.com/bobby/html/en/
• 33: WebAIM. Americans with Disabilities Act (1990), Retrieved March 15 2005 from http://www.webaim.org/coordination/law/us/ada/
• 34: WebCredible. The DRC Blew it. May 2004, Retrieved March 16 2005 from http://www.webcredible.co.uk/user-friendly-resources/web-accessibility/drc-blew-it.shtml
• 35: Jeffrey Zeldman, Designing With Web Standards, New Riders Publishing, Thousand Oaks, CA, 2003

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.5 INFORMATION INTERFACES AND PRESENTATION (I.7)
      H.5.2 User Interfaces (D.2.2, H.1.2, I.3.6)

Additional Classification:
  K. Computing Milieux
  K.4 COMPUTERS AND SOCIETY
      K.4.2 Social Issues

General Terms:
Documentation, Human Factors, Legal Aspects, Measurement, Standardization, Verification

Keywords:
WAI, WCAG, guidelines, methodologies, web accessibility