|
Towards Accessible ICT :
Promoting Accessible ICT :
Expert Group Meeting on Information and Communications Technologies (ICT)
for Persons with Disabilities
Beirut, 25-26 May 2004
Promoting Accessible Information and Communications Technologies with
Reasonable Adaptation:
learning from the Manila "Declaration" and "Design
Recommendations" on Accessible ICT*
Part 3 of 7:
 Previous
Next
Skip to Part:
Contents, 1,
2, 3,
4, 5,
6, 7
III. Strategic Framework for Capacity Building for Accessibility with Reasonable Adaptation
A. Demand and supply considerations
Traditionally, the focus in the development of training and resource
materials on accessible ICT has been users with special needs, with those who
produce content appropriate to end users with special needs as well as those who
may have limited information and communications technologies infrastructure.
However, the "Manila Declaration" directed special emphasis not only to the
instrumental and empowerment capacities of ICT in furthering equalization of
opportunities for persons with disabilities but to accessible ICT a part of the
broad human rights framework and development. Accessibility is a concern
for everyone. The rapidly growth in users of mobile communication devices
-- telephones as well as personal digital assistants (PDAs) -- has created a new
constituency for accessible ICT and ease of access to mobility-enabled
information goods and services.
Participation on the basis of equality requires accessible information and
communications technologies, since technologies that may create barriers for
some will limit opportunities for many to participate in civil and political
life and engage in social, economic and cultural activities that are essential
for the realization of improved well being and livelihoods for all.
Thus, the demand for training and resource materials on accessible ICT goes
beyond the traditional estimate of 600 million persons with disabilities and
would include ICT policy makers, professionals, academics and producers and
consumers of information goods and services -- public and private.
The capacity building framework aims to promote awareness and present options
to strengthen knowledge of principles and concepts of ICT accessibility with
reasonable adaptation for all, with special attention directed to Internet
accessibility. The framework is event driven, given the rapid pace of
change in the ICT field. To cite but one example: the increased use of
digital content in both the production and transmission of television services
and the cinema. These developments have important implications for
development of accessibility metrics -- as well as security protocols -- to
facilitate the shift from analogue to digital services.
The decided emphasis in capacity building is to provide knowledge and skill
that will result in the progressive removal of handicapping conditions for
persons with disabilities in recognition of accessibility as a basic human
right.. The framework includes a review of policy options to promote
accessibility, procedures and standards on accessible ICT, and approaches to
advocacy, monitoring and self-evaluation. The presentation draws on pilot
materials prepared, tested and evaluated in connection with United Nations
seminars and workshops on training of trainers for Internet accessibility and
persons with disabilities.[36]
A further consideration for capacity building is that the ICT field is
characterized by equally rapid changes in institutional arrangements, which
include privatization of telecommunications services and public and private
sector cooperation in the formulation, testing and evaluation, and submission of
recommendations for standards and protocols. Experience suggests that rapid
prototyping of materials, systematic testing and evaluation are essential
components of effective and sustainable capacity building, which also requires
open and democratic networks of excellence for ideas, feedback and exchanges of
knowledge and experience as well as to identify and undertake joint projects and
establish alliances to support of accessible ICT objectives.
The strategic framework for accessible ICT is based on six decision points
related to analysis, planning, development, monitoring and evaluation of ICT
accessibility with reasonable adaptation, with special attention directed to
accessible Internet-enabled content and services. Concluding remarks focus on
reinforcing the training experience.
- Policy framework for ICT accessibility with reasonable adaptation;
- Assessing user needs and preferences;
- Standards and guidelines for planning and design;
- Selected procedures and tools;
- Monitoring and evaluation of content and service accessibility;
- Promotion, information and outreach.
B. ICT accessibility policy
considerations
Policy considerations are important since the underlying technology of the
Internet presents no obstacles to accessibility. Obstacles are built into
particular applications and uses, which are growing at an exponential rate. A
number of key policy issues are currently being debated in countries and in
international fora, which include universal services, domain names,
intellectual property and Internet governance.[37]
An exchange on policy considerations should result in identification of a policy
framework on accessibility with reasonable adaptation.
The principle source of international policy guidance on accessible ICT is
Rule 5 -- Accessibility -- of the Standard Rules. Pilot training workshops
and seminars organized in support of the United Nations global programme on
disability include a specific session on the Standard Rules to reinforce their
role in the design and evaluation of disability-sensitive policies, strategies
and programmes.[38]
With the introduction of draft text on an "accessibility" article in the new
international convention to promote and protect the rights and dignity of
persons with disabilities, training activities will need to address issues of
promoting awareness of the proposed article and measures to further its
implementation once the draft convention is adopted by the United Nations
General Assembly and ratified by governments. Further considerations
include approaches to monitoring and evaluation of compliance with the
accessibility article and reporting mechanisms on progress in implementing the
convention by States parties.
A third issue in training of trainers is the need to link relevant national
law and administrative guidance with international norms and appropriate
standards on accessibility. Some governments and the European Union have
opted into the accessibility guidance presented in the Web Content Accessibility
Initiative of the World Wide Web Consortium, a private, non-profit organization.
While other governments have formulated accessibility guidance based on national
legislation, such as Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of the United States,
which presents accessibility standards for electronic and information
technologies.[39]
The "Manila Declaration" and its associated "Design Recommendations"
represent an attempt to provide a critical minimum threshold for accessible ICT
designs, products and services, which build upon relevant international norms
and standards and selected national experience and technical standards.
One lesson of the Manila experience is that there is no one policy solution
to accessible ICT in the light of the rapid pace of change and the growing
number of users who require flexibility in making full use of mobile services
and better to exploit the convergence in digital audio and video services.
Opting in to any one set of standards or adoption of a particular set of
national law and administrative regulations means that external bodies deal with
ongoing accessibility research, testing and evaluation of new technologies,
document and disseminate findings and submit recommendations. However,
opting into a particular accessibility regime can present constraints on
national ICT infrastructure, public and private, since external standards
presuppose an assumed level of institutional and technical capacity. ICT
developers, providers of services and regulatory bodies may therefore need to
approach accessibility as an added cost rather than integral component in their
estimates to design, build, operate and maintain ICT goods and services.
The Manila outcome documents are based upon agreed international norms, are
consistent with deliberations on accessibility in the Ad Hoc Committee and
provide a critical minimum of technical guidance to design and produce
accessibility with reasonable adaptation for all.
The Manila outcome documents do not address the question of Internet
governance but draw upon material developed in connection with pilot training on
"International Information Structures and Technologies: the social perspective"[40]
presented at United Nations headquarters in the late 1990s, shortly after
Internet access was provided all staff members. In this presentation it
was noted that no one body "controlled the Internet", that it was a set of
global networks based on open standards; it was argued that the global Internet
represented the "ultimate global commons"[41]
where no one part can function well without all other parts operating well, and
from this perspective, some form of overall governance was essential. The
presentation further noted that any framework for Internet governance would need
to be based on agreements by governments but that it must also bring on board
the many Internet constituencies -- private sector, technical bodies and
societies, non-governmental organizations and civil society -- that currently
exist or can be forecast with reasonable expectation which without a whole,
there will be no parts.[42]
The question of Internet governance has been identified as an important topic
in preparations for the Second phase WSIS, scheduled for Tunis in 2005[43]
and the Secretary-General of the United Nations has been requested to convene a
Working Group that will (1) develop a working definition of Internet governance;
(2) identify public policy issues that are relevant to Internet governance; (3)
develop a common understanding of the respective roles and responsibilities of
governments, existing intergovernmental and international organizations and
other forums as well as the private sector and civil society from both
developing and developed countries; (4) prepare a report on the results of this
activity to be presented for consideration and appropriate action for the Second
phase of WSIS to be held at Tunis in 2005. The outcome of the WSIS-related
Working Group on Internet Governance together with the results of the
deliberations of the Ad Hoc Committee on the new international convention to
promote and protect the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities will
influence further developments in Internet policy analysis and evaluations
resource and training materials.[44]
While beyond the scope of the current discussion on accessible ICT policy
options, two other issues increasingly are part of Internet policy dialogue: (1)
security and privacy and (2) copyright and fair use.
1. Security and privacy
issues are associated with the fact that the Internet is Internet is a global
network of computers, based on open standards, which share and exchange
information. The ease of communications over the global Internet introduces
possibilities of unauthorized use, theft or tampering with personal or
organizational -- public and private -- information.[45]
From a technical standpoint, security is important both to the integrity of the
global Internet and the safe and confidential exchange of personal or
organizational information. From a policy perspective, Internet security
and privacy issues need to be addressed at the level of national law and
administrative guidance; and a growing number of countries have enacted
legislation on Internet-related crime.[46]
Policy studies on global trends in Internet-related crime as well as technical
cooperation in the field are provided by the United Nations Centre for Crime
Prevention and Criminal Justice.[47]
From an organizational perspective, security policies build upon relevant
national law and outline risk and acceptable use, which are separate from
procedural and technology issues, such operating system maintenance, intrusion
detection and data encryption.
2. Copyright and fair use issues are associated with the ease with which
intellectual property can be translated into a digital resource, published on
the Internet and shared widely. This is said to contribute to the global
body of knowledge and promote creativity; others contend that unauthorized use
of materials under copyright is theft. A number of these issues are developed
in a new book by the legal scholar, Professor Lawrence Lessig -- Free Culture
(Penguin Press, 2004)[48] in which
he argues that intellectual property is an instrument that sets the groundwork
for a creative society; while intellectual property law is to support the value
of creativity, he is of the view that large corporations are using the law to
lock up creativity for their own purposes. In addition to the free
software movement,[49]
characterized notably by the Linux community, some scholars, including Professor
Lessig, are advocating a "middle approach" for greater sharing of intellectual
property while providing appropriate attribution to those who create the
intellectual property through a "Creative Commons License" <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/1.0/>.
C. Assessing user needs and preferences
Accessible Internet-enabled resources and services require both an analysis
of user needs, interests and capacities, and planning and testing of content.
Issues to be considered in the analysis of user needs and content planning
include determination of objectives, planning and testing of content, including
content maintenance, publicizing the site, and monitoring and evaluation of the
effects of the content development effort.[50]
Accessible Internet-enabled content also introduces aesthetic and usability
considerations.[51] Web sites
can easily meet technical accessibility criteria. However, if their design
proves to be to navigate, uses colors that do not enhance the viewing experience
or does not provide an enjoyable or comprehensible visit, such accessible Web
sites do not further the equitable ICT access and use objective.
Accessible site design must also include sustainability considerations, which
are based on both an assessments of user needs, periodic content management and
evaluation of the continued accessibility of content.[52]
In the planning for a pilot project on Internet accessibility for the
Division for Social Policy and Development of the United Nations Secretariat,
the assessment of corporate user needs was a somewhat more complex process,
which began with (1) identification of target audiences for content provided by
the Division in terms of segments, preferences and interests, (2) analysis of
the messages to be delivered, in terms of key issues and core competencies of
the Division, (3) review of institutional identity attributes, in terms of
positioning among other United Nations Secretariat Units and desired image to
present to its constituencies, (4) the value added of the Division Web site and
(5) outline of a linking strategy to promote awareness of the new content.[53]
For training purposes the most effective approach to develop a user needs
assessment and content planning and evaluation skills is through rapid
prototyping of an individual -- or small-group -- Web page, as presented below:
Accessibility planning worksheet: an exercise for producers of accessible
Internet content[54]
- State the purpose and objective you are pursuing;
- Define your target audience;
- Define the information needs of target audience that you intend to meet;
- Describe the main technological and disability characteristics of the target audience;
- Describe your main area of expertise in comparative advantage terms;
- Describe in general terms the data sets you intend to provide;
- Describe the main intended results of the data sets;
- Describe how you plan to schedule updates of the information;
- Describe the type of site you think would be most appropriate, given the kinds
of information you want to present, the target audience and your resources
(financial and technical);
- Describe your strategy for publicizing the site; and
- Describe briefly how you think you will monitor and evaluate your site.
D. Accessibility standards and guidelines for planning and design
One of the principal sources in the production of accessibility standards and
guidelines is the Web Content Accessibility Initiative (WCAG) of the World Wide
Web Consortium (W3C). [55]
The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, WCAG 1.0,[56]
were first published in 1999 by W3C, a private non-profit organization, as
recommended design principles for creating accessible Web content. The
current draft of the Guidelines, WCAG 2.0, provides a comprehensive and
extensive presentation of concepts that apply to all Web-based content and with
reference to an expanded set of information devices. Their design principles are
not specific to HTML,[57]
XML,[58] or any other
technology, so W3C is of the view that they can be applied to a variety of
situations and technologies, including those that do not yet exist.
WCAG 2.0 (working draft) presents non-technology-specific guidelines, success
criteria (normative) and definitions, benefits and examples (non-normative) for
each guideline, and an appendix containing definitions, references and other
support information. The WCAG 2.0 (draft) is based on four design
principles:
- Content must be perceivable;
- Interface elements in the content must be operable;
- Content and controls must be understandable;
- Content must be robust enough to work with current and future technologies.
Since WCAG 2.0 is a "working draft", W3C has not yet published a technical
checklist on its application in the design of accessible Web content; its
current checklist is based on WCAG 1.0.[59]
A number of governments and the European Commission[60]
have adopted WCAG 1.0 as the basis for national law on Web accessibility.
Another frequently cited accessibility standard is Section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act (amended) of 1998 of the United States.[61]
Section 508 requires that United States Federal agencies provide people with
disabilities with access to their electronic and information technologies that
are comparable to access available to others. Section 508 was enacted to
eliminate barriers in information technology, to make available new
opportunities for people with disabilities, and to encourage development of
technologies that will help achieve these goals.
Section 508 includes technical standards and performance-based requirements
related to various technologies, which include:
- Software applications and operating systems;
- Web-based information or applications;
- Telecommunication products;
- Video and multimedia products;
- Self contained, closed products (e.g., information kiosks, calculators, and fax
machines);
- Desktop and portable computers.[62]
To implement the Section 508 standards for accessible Web content,
[63] an online course to train Web
developers in concepts and techniques of Accessible Web site design was
developed by Dr. Jim Thatcher[64]
(a developer of the "accessibility guidelines" of the IBM Corporation[65])
and the Information Technology and Technical Assistance Training Center (ITTATC)
of the Georgia Institute of Technology (USA) <http://www.ittatc.org/>.
The course is in 12 sections <http://www.ittatc.org/training/webcourse/>:
- Web Accessibility for Section 508
- Alternative
Content for Graphics
- Checking Your Web Pages for Accessibility
- Accessible Navigation
- Image Maps
- Audio and Multimedia
- Special Cases
- Accessible Forms
- Accessible Tables
- Scripts and Applets
- Cascading Style Sheets
- Review of Section 508 Standards for Web Accessibility
A third resource for accessible Web design, development and evaluation is the
"Manila Accessible ICT Design Recommendations"[66]
which are an outcome of the United Nations Interregional Seminar and Regional
Demonstration Workshop on Accessible ICT and Persons with Disabilities, Manila,
Philippines (3-7 March 2003).[67]
The Manila Design Recommendations aim to provide countries with a critical
minimum checklist for the design and development of accessible Web content.
The normative basis of the Manila Accessible ICT Design Recommendations is
Rule 5 (Accessibility) of the Standard Rules.
The conceptual basis of the Manila Accessible ICT Design Recommendations is
Universal Design[68] in
the light of its focus on designs that meet the needs of diverse users through
inclusive solutions and open and democratic participation. Accessible ICT
designs based on universal concepts provide for flexibility to accommodate those
who operate in low bandwidth settings, use cell phones to synthesize text and
may access the Internet or use other electronic appliances by means of
alternative devices.
The Manila Design Recommendations identify five considerations when designing
for Web accessibility:
- Content is organized and presented appropriate to the interests, needs and
preferences of end users;
- Aesthetics of the design accommodate the needs and preferences of diverse users;
- Accessibility of the design benefits all users as well as users with special
needs;
- Usability[69] of the
design allows users to access, navigate, search and leave the information resource easily, intuitively and without barriers;
- Sustainability of the design is based on content management that affords
flexibility to accommodate needs and preferences of diverse users.
The Manila Design Recommendations are based on the premise that accessibility
is achieved easily and efficiently with the application of "first principles" of
accessibility:
- Every visual element should be implemented with a textual element that describes
it. Alternative text <alt> allows for description of graphical images.
- The structure and layout of the document should be dealt with separately.
Structure is defined by HTML (Hypertext Markup Language) elements and attributes; and layout is
defined by style sheets.
Separation of layout from content aids text browsers to extract easily the
logical structure of the document.[70]
The Manila Design Recommendations identify a select set of "electronic curb
cuts"[71] that will
provide flexibility to accommodate each user's needs and preferences and
eliminate thereby possible barriers in Web-based information goods and services.
Seven points are identified:
- Provide an Access Instruction page for visitors (explaining the accessibility
features of the Web site
and providing an e-mail hyperlink for visitors to communicate problems with Web page accessibility);
- Provide support for text browsers and descriptive hyperlinks (links such as
"this" and "click here" do not alone convey the nature of the target link);
- Attach ALT<alt> (alternative) text to graphic images so that assistive computer
technology such as screen readers can reach the content;
- For each photographic image which contributes meaningful content to the page,
provide a "D" hyperlink to a page that provides descriptive text of the image;
- Provide text transcriptions or descriptions for all audio and video clips;
- Provide alternative mechanisms for online forms since forms are not supported by
all browsers (such as e-mail or voice/TTY phone numbers);
- Avoid access barriers, such as the posting of documents in Adobe®PDF (Portable Document Format), non-linear format, Frame format or requiring visitors to
download software to access the content. If posting in Adobe®PDF, accessible HTML
(Hypertext Markup Language) or ASCII text must also be posted by the Web master converting
the document.[72]
From a training perspective, deciding on which set of standards and
guidelines to use will be influenced by the relevant national legislation.
If government have decided to apply the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG),
then these are the reference training document. While WCAG is a
comprehensive set of guidelines, they are the product of an opt in process,
which is to say one needs to be associated with W3C or its appropriate technical
committee to have an impact on the WCAG process; and application WCAG requires
sites to post the W3C "Accessibility logo" to confirm the accessibility
validation of the site in accordance with WCAG.
In contrast, the Manila Accessible ICT Design Recommendations are based on
relevant international norms and key technical design standards. They
provide a critical minimum for the design and development of accessible Web
content. The "WorldEnable Validator" <http://www.worldenable.net/wevalidator.htm>
provides an online tool that tests and provides diagnostics in accordance with
the Manila Design Recommendations on accessible Web sites. Moreover, the
"WorldEnable Validator" does not oblige sites to post an "accessibility logo"
ex-post.
E. Selected procedures and tools
Orientation and training in accessibility procedures and tools should begin
with a concise, technical review of the concepts of accessibility, Internet
accessibility and Web accessibility.[73]
Three accessibility considerations are important in this regard: accessibility
of e-Mail clients, Web-based content and services, and Internet-enabled
resources,[74] which should include
a discussion of corporate Intranets[75],
Extranets[76] and Portals.[77]
The discussions should also review accessibility considerations in personal
computers[78] and the role of
assistive technologies,[79]
particularly for users with sensorial or mobility disabilities.
A related issue is a review and discussion of online accessibility validators
and related Web quality assurance tools. In this connection it is
important to distinguish between online tools that examine Web pages with
reference to a set of specific accessibility criteria, such as WCAG, Section 508
or the Manila Design Recommendations, and tools that assess the coherence and
consistency of the content of a Web page:
"HyperText
Markup Language (HTML) validators are Standard Generalized Markup Language (SGML) Parsers that check the mark-up language of a Web page against its
document-type definition (DTD). A DTD for a Web page is listed before the <html> tag in the
source code and defines the type of HTML being used and the mark-up tags that
can be employed within the page. HTML validators can tell users whether or not their code is valid or invalid.
"In
contrast to HTML validators, accessibility tools cannot tell users whether or
not their Web pages are completely accessible or inaccessible.
All accessibility tools scan the source code of a Web page
using interpretations of either the United States Rehabilitation Act Section 508
standards and/or the
World Wide Web Consortium's Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 (WCAG).
These tools
help can help individuals spot glaring accessibility errors and remind users of
accessibility issues that require manual checks."[80]
The W3C has produced its own online validator for WCAG <http://validator.w3.org/>,
which checks documents like HTML and XHTML for conformance to W3C
Recommendations and other standards.
Online validation of Section 508 Web accessibility compliance is available
from a number of governmental and non-governmental organizations. An
notable validator is CynthiaSays® <http://www.cynthiasays.com/>,
which is a joint education and outreach initiative of the International Center
for Disability Research on the Internet (ICDRI) <http://www.icdri.org/>,
the Internet Society Disability and Special Needs Chapter <http://www.isocdisab.org/>
and the HiSoftware Corporation <http://www.isocdisab.org/>.
CynthiaSays® was created for the purpose of identifying errors in Web design
related to Section 508 standards and WCAG guidelines and educating Web site
developers about creation of Web-based content that is accessible to all.
As noted in the preceding section the WorldEnable Validator <http://www.worldenable.net/wevalidator.htm>
assesses Web pages with reference to the accessibility considerations of the
Manila Accessible ICT Design Recommendations. As with CynthiaSays® the
purpose of the WorldEnable Validator is both promotional -- accessible Web design
is easy and does not present undue burdens on site developers -- and educational
-- where corrections and adjustments to Web page content and structure would lead
to improved accessibility for all.
Quality assurance tools address issues such as speed of page loads, use of
colour and programming in HTML:
The Web Design Group HTML Validator <http://www.htmlhelp.com/tools/validator/>
is the product of the private non-profit WDG organization, which is concerned
with promoting the creation of non-browser specific, non-resolution specific,
creative and informative Web sites that are accessible to all users worldwide.
Juicy Studio <http://www.juicystudio.com/index.asp>
is a private site that aims to promote best practice for Web developers, and
programmers. It has published a number of online Web quality assurance
tools:
-
Readability Test -- Analyses a Web page to determine how readable it is <http://www.juicystudio.com/fog/>;
-
Link Analyser -- Tests Web pages for broken links <http://www.juicystudio.com/services/linktest.asp>;
-
Image Analyser -- Tests Web pages to ensure that images have been
specified properly <http://www.juicystudio.com/services/image.asp>
-
CSS Accessibility Analyser -- Checks CSS [Cascading Style Sheet] files for
potential accessibility issues <http://www.juicystudio.com/services/csstest.asp>;
-
Colour Contrast Analyser -- Tests whether the contrast between background
and foreground is sufficient <http://www.juicystudio.com/services/colourcontrast.asp>.
The Web Page Analyzer (0.82) <http://www.websiteoptimization.com/services/analyze/>,
supported by Web Site Optimization, LLC a private-sector firm, tests Web site
complexity and load speeds under several Internet access options, from dialup to
high-speed Internet services.
F. Monitoring and evaluation of content and service accessibility
There are two aspects to monitoring and evaluation of content and services.
The first relates to systematic monitoring and assessment of a site to ensure
that new content has not resulted in a degradation of its accessibility or
usability. Online accessibility validators and quality assurance tools can
serve this task.
Monitoring and evaluation of content and service accessibility will be an
important consideration for Web developers once the new international convention
to promote and protect the rights and dignity of persons with disability comes
into force in the light of its (draft) article on accessibility. States
parties to the convention as well as civil society would be potential clients
for an online accessibility validator based upon whatever accessibility
provisions are adopted in the international convention. Since the
WorldEnable Validator is based upon the Standard Rules and the International
Covenants on Civil and Political Rights and on Social, Economic and Cultural
Rights, it represents a logical candidate for further development in support of
the convention.
A second consideration, which may only form part of specialized training
activities, relates to technical monitoring of a Web site in terms of visits,
operational characteristics and security matters. Most Web monitoring
tools are produced by commercial software publishers, but there is a body of
open source and freeware Web monitoring and site maintenance tools that can be
consulted, tested and evaluated in line with the needs and resources of a
particular site. One resource is the AWStats Project <http://awstats.sourceforge.net/>
which offers the "AWStats Analyzer" as a free, downloadable tool, distributed
under the GNU
General Public License,[81]
that generates Web, FTP or Mail server statistics, graphically. AWStats works
from the command line but also as a CGI [Common Gateway Interface].[82]
Another resource, which requires installation of the Microsoft .NETframework on
the client computer, is "Site Monitor Bot" <
http://sitemonitorbot.com/>, which is
free Web site monitoring tool that runs from the "Task Bar of a client computer.
Site Monitor Bot checks a site when the client computer is turned on, rechecks
every two hours afterward, and warns when a site is down.
An important resource of information on monitoring and evaluation tools is
available at "The Open Directory Project <
http://dmoz.org/>, which is described as the largest, most comprehensive
human-edited directory of the Web. The Open Directory includes a comprehensive
set of multi-lingual resources on "Web Design and Development" <http://dmoz.org/Computers/Internet/Web_Design_and_Development/>,
which includes an "Accessibility" sub-directory, and companion sub-directories
that deal with "Web Usability" and "Authoring".
G. Promotion, information and
outreach
Design, development and regular maintenance of content of an accessible Web
site are important to its recognition and use as a trusted and valued
information resource and service. However, good design and quality content
do not translate automatically into a successful and viable Web site.
Promotion of a Web site is a combination of technical and human relations skills
as well as luck.
Since the suggested starting point in any capacity building activity is a
users needs and preferences survey, the results of the survey should provide
metrics by which the Web design can assess the effects of decisions on content
development, content management and structure of the site on its intended users.
The user needs assessment should also include suggestions for linking strategies
and ways to reinforce organizational identity and core competencies of the host
organization.
Most Web monitoring software can provide statistics on site visitors to
provide insights about unintended users and on the length that visitors stay on
the sight and the resources they use.
Another related consideration in Web design is to optimization of the site
for search engine recognition.[83]
A comprehensive, multi-lingual set of technical training resources on Web
promotion are available from The Open Directory <http://dmoz.org/Computers/Internet/Web_Design_and_Development/Promotion/>.
H. Concluding remarks: reinforcing the training experience
The paper has reviewed issues and trends in the rapidly changing field of
information and communications technologies (ICT) from the perspective of
accessibility with reasonable adaptation. Accessibility is identified as
an essential component of the broad human rights framework and development.
The United Nations Standard Rules on Equalization of Opportunities for Persons
with Disabilities provide in Rule 5 that accessibility is a precondition for
full participation and equality of persons with disabilities.
Accessibility has emerged as an important consideration in the process of
elaborating an international convention to promote and protect the rights and
dignity of persons with disabilities. The Working Group established by the
Ad Hoc Committee concerned with the elaboration of the convention met at United
Nations New York from 5-16 January 2004 to prepare a draft text of the
convention, which includes a specific article on accessibility. Two forces are
driving accessibility concerns. One is the pace of elaborating a new
international convention to promote and protect the rights and dignity of
persons with disabilities, which, when adopted, is expected to include an
article on "accessibility". The second force relates to the rapid
expansion in mobile communications and growing use of mobile communication
devices to access Internet-enabled resources. Mobile users prefer sites
that load quickly, are easy to navigate and use, and provide text equivalents
for graphical content for low-bandwidth conditions[84]
-- in short, accessible Web sites. Accessibility is a concern for all.
The development case for accessibility is its contribution in building a
society for all; the value proposition is accessible designs provide the best
possible solutions for all and not for any particular constituency.[85]
The challenge of any training experience is how to reinforce the experience,
its outcome and promote networks of excellence that may develop among fellows
and the training team. One approach is to have training conclude with
preparation of an individual or small-group accessible ICT "strategic planning
outline". The aim is to have the fellows present the training outcome in a
concise way that reflects their own aspirations, concerns, interests and
objectives for accessible ICT. Experience suggests an accessible ICT
planning outline address five points:
1.
Vision for accessible ICT with reasonable adaptation. The Vision
statement communicates the need and importance of the accessible ICT initiative and the presents an
"image" how this relates to the concerned work group / organizational unit.
2.
Mission. The Mission statement describes why the accessible ICT
agenda is important to the work group / organization and its specialized constituencies.
3.
Objective(s). The Objective statement defines what is to be done in
clear, distinct, operational, time-bound and measurable terms.
4.
Strategy(ies). The Strategic statement will describe the general
direction, guiding values and principles, potential partners, and methods to pursue the accessible ICT
agenda.
5.
Plan, monitor and evaluate. The Plan would describe proposed actions,
concerned agents and intended participants, and timeframe for
translating objectives into outputs. The Plan would also identify suggested measures of progress and performance for monitoring, and
expected outcomes for evaluation purposes.
To stimulate networking, plan outlines could be published on an accessible
ICT training and resources Web site and include a "forum" to exchange ideas and
experiences on furthering the accessible ICT agenda.
A "plan outline" for the first phase of the pilot Internet accessibility
project undertaken on behalf of the Division for Social Policy and Development
of the United Nations Secretariat was submitted in a report of the
Secretary-General to the General Assembly at its fifty-fourth session
(A/54/388Add.1).[86]
A final consideration: accessibility is always "under construction" given the
rapid pace of change in the ICT field and the changing needs, preferences and
capacities of end users. An accessibility plan outline is only a beginning
in the process of furthering an accessible ICT with reasonable adaptation
agenda.
Notes
[37] See John R. Mathiason,
"Internet Policy: links between policies and accessibility" <http://www.worldenable.net/iapolicy/policypresentation/index.htm>.
[38] See "Online guide to the
Standard Rules" <
http://www.worldenable.net/standardrules/default.htm>.
[39] See Cynthia D. Waddell, JD,
"Empowering Persons with Disabilities through ICT U.S. Accessible Web Policy &
Law" <http://www.worldenable.net/manila2003/MatA2a.htm>.
[40] <
http://www.intlmgt.com/portfolio/infostruc.html>.
[41] The concept of a "commons"
is "any resource that is used as though it belongs to all; when anyone can use a
shared resource simply because one wants or needs to use it, then one is using a
commons. A commons is destroyed by uncontrolled use -- neither intent of the
user, nor ownership are important. See the seminal article: Garrett
Hardin, "The Tragedy of the Commons". Science Magazine, 162: 3859 (13
December 1968) pp. 1243-1248 <http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/162/3859/1243>.
[42] John R. Mathiason and
Charles C. Khulman, "The Internet, international regulation & new policy
structures". Paper presented to International Studies Association, Panel on Cyberhype or the Deterritorialization of Politics? (Minneapolis MN (USA)
21March 1998) <http://www.intlmgt.com/portfolio/ITSpaper.html>.
[43] "Declaration of
Principles", op.cit. paragraph 50: "International Internet governance
issues should be addressed in a coordinated manner. We ask the Secretary-General
of the United Nations to set up a working group on Internet governance, in an
open and inclusive process that ensures a mechanism for the full and active
participation of governments, the private sector and civil society from both
developing and developed countries, involving relevant intergovernmental and
international organizations and forums, to investigate and make proposals for
action, as appropriate, on the governance of Internet by 2005".
[44] See the discussion of
issues in Milton Mueller, John Mathiason, Lee W. McKnight, "Making Sense of
"Internet Governance": Defining Principles and Norms". Contributed paper to
sixth session of UN ICT Task Force (New York, 25-27 March 2004) <http://www.unicttaskforce.org/perl/documents.pl?id=1293>.
[45] For an overview of issues,
see "Security of the Internet" <http://www.cert.org/encyc_article/tocencyc.html>;
a review of technical issues is presented at <
http://www.microsoft.com/security/> for the Microsoft Windows® operating
system; <http://www.info.apple.com/usen/security/index.html
> for the Apple Computer OS X operating system; and <
http://www.freebsd.org/security/>
for the FreeBSD operating system.
[46] Stein Schjolberg, Chief
Judge, Moss District Court (Norway), "The Legal Framework -- Unauthorized Access
to Computer Systems; Penal Legislation in 44 Countries " (7 April 2003) <http://www.mosstingrett.no/info/legal.html
>; for an example of a national report see, 2003 Australian Computer Crime
and Security Survey <http://national.auscert.org.au/render.html?it=2001>.
[47] "Effective measures to
prevent and control computer-related crime; report of the Secretary-General"
(E/CN.15/2002/8) <http://www.unodc.org:80/pdf/crime/commissions/11comm/8f.pdf
>.
[48] Free download of the
publication is available via <http://www.free-culture.cc/>.
[49] Eric S. Raymond, "The
Cathedral and the Bazaar" <http://www.firstonday.dk/issues/issue3_3/raymond/>
-- an important discussion of the origin, philosophy and rationale of open-source
software; see also <http://opensource.oreilly.com/
>.
[50] John R. Mathiason,
"Planning for Accessibility" (1998) <http://www.worldenable.net/iaplanning/planningpresentation/index.htm>.
[51] See "Usability guide" <http://www.usablenet.com/accessibility_usability/usability.html>.
[52] Leo Valdes, "Design
Considerations for Delivering Online Information" (2003) <http://www.worldenable.net/manila2003/MatC1a.htm>.
[53] Oliva Acosta and Vision
Office Support Services Ltd (North Vancouver BC (Canada)), consultants to the
United Nations, "Assessment Report" (1998) <
http://www.visionoffice.com/spd/papers/papers3.htm>.
[54] John R. Mathiason,
"Planning for Accessibility" op.cit, 'Being a good producer' <http://www.worldenable.net/iaplanning/producer.html>.
[55] <http://www.w3c.org>.
[56] <http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/>.
[57] Hypertext Markup Language
is lingua franca for publishing hypertext content on the World Wide Web;
the current standard is HTML 4.01 <http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/>.
[58] Extensible Markup Language
is lingua franca for data representation on the World Wide Web. The XML
Core Working Group publishes recommendations, some of which are still drafts, on
XML, which include XML 1.0 (Third Edition) and XML 1.1 <http://www.w3.org/XML/Core/#Publications>.
[59] List of Checkpoints for
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 <http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/checkpoint-list.html>.
Priorities
Each checkpoint has a priority level assigned by the Working Group based on
the checkpoint's impact on accessibility.
[Priority 1]
A Web content developer must satisfy this checkpoint. Otherwise, one or more
groups will find it impossible to access information in the document. Satisfying
this checkpoint is a basic requirement for some groups to be able to use Web
documents.
[Priority 2]
A Web content developer should satisfy this checkpoint. Otherwise, one or
more groups will find it difficult to access information in the document.
Satisfying this checkpoint will remove significant barriers to accessing Web
documents.
[Priority 3]
A Web content developer may address this checkpoint. Otherwise, one or more
groups will find it somewhat difficult to access information in the document.
Satisfying this checkpoint will improve access to Web documents.
Some checkpoints specify a priority level that may change under certain
(indicated) conditions.
Priority 1 checkpoints
In General (Priority 1)
1.1 Provide a text equivalent for every non-text element (e.g., via "alt", "longdesc",
or in element content). This includes: images, graphical representations of text
(including symbols), image map regions, animations (e.g., animated GIFs),
applets and programmatic objects, ASCII art, frames, scripts, images used as
list bullets, spacers, graphical buttons, sounds (played with or without user
interaction), stand-alone audio files, audio tracks of video, and video.
2.1 Ensure that all information conveyed with color is also available without
color, for example from context or markup.
4.1 Clearly identify changes in the natural language of a document's text and
any text equivalents (e.g., captions).
6.1 Organize documents so they may be read without style sheets. For example,
when an HTML document is rendered without associated style sheets, it must still
be possible to read the document.
6.2 Ensure that equivalents for dynamic content are updated when the dynamic
content changes.
7.1 Until user agents allow users to control flickering, avoid causing the
screen to flicker.
14.1 Use the clearest and simplest language appropriate for a site's content.
And if you use images and image maps (Priority 1)
1.2 Provide redundant text links for each active region of a server-side
image map.
9.1 Provide client-side image maps instead of server-side image maps except
where the regions cannot be defined with an available geometric shape.
And if you use tables (Priority 1)
5.1 For data tables, identify row and column headers.
5.2 For data tables that have two or more logical levels of row or column
headers, use markup to associate data cells and header cells.
And if you use frames (Priority 1)
12.1 Title each frame to facilitate frame identification and navigation.
And if you use applets and scripts (Priority 1)
6.3 Ensure that pages are usable when scripts, applets, or other programmatic
objects are turned off or not supported. If this is not possible, provide
equivalent information on an alternative accessible page.
And if you use multimedia (Priority 1)
1.3 Until user agents can automatically read aloud the text equivalent of a
visual track, provide an auditory description of the important information of
the visual track of a multimedia presentation.
1.4 For any time-based multimedia presentation (e.g., a movie or animation),
synchronize equivalent alternatives (e.g., captions or auditory descriptions of
the visual track) with the presentation.
And if all else fails (Priority 1)
11.4 If, after best efforts, you cannot create an accessible page, provide a
link to an alternative page that uses W3C technologies, is accessible, has
equivalent information (or functionality), and is updated as often as the
inaccessible (original) page.
Priority 2 checkpoints
In General (Priority 2)
2.2 Ensure that foreground and background color combinations provide
sufficient contrast when viewed by someone having color deficits or when viewed
on a black and white screen. [Priority 2 for images, Priority 3 for text].
3.1 When an appropriate markup language exists, use markup rather than images
to convey information.
3.2 Create documents that validate to published formal grammars.
3.3 Use style sheets to control layout and presentation.
3.4 Use relative rather than absolute units in markup language attribute
values and style sheet property values.
3.5 Use header elements to convey document structure and use them according
to specification.
3.6 Mark up lists and list items properly.
3.7 Mark up quotations. Do not use quotation markup for formatting effects
such as indentation.
6.5 Ensure that dynamic content is accessible or provide an alternative
presentation or page.
7.2 Until user agents allow users to control blinking, avoid causing content
to blink (i.e., change presentation at a regular rate, such as turning on and
off).
7.4 Until user agents provide the ability to stop the refresh, do not create
periodically auto-refreshing pages.
7.5 Until user agents provide the ability to stop auto-redirect, do not use
markup to redirect pages automatically. Instead, configure the server to perform
redirects.
10.1 Until user agents allow users to turn off spawned windows, do not cause
pop-ups or other windows to appear and do not change the current window without
informing the user.
11.1 Use W3C technologies when they are available and appropriate for a task
and use the latest versions when supported.
11.2 Avoid deprecated features of W3C technologies.
12.3 Divide large blocks of information into more manageable groups where
natural and appropriate.
13.1 Clearly identify the target of each link.
13.2 Provide metadata to add semantic information to pages and sites.
13.3 Provide information about the general layout of a site (e.g., a site map
or table of contents).
13.4 Use navigation mechanisms in a consistent manner.
And if you use tables (Priority 2)
5.3 Do not use tables for layout unless the table makes sense when linearized.
Otherwise, if the table does not make sense, provide an alternative equivalent
(which may be a linearized version).
5.4 If a table is used for layout, do not use any structural markup for the
purpose of visual formatting.
And if you use frames (Priority 2)
12.2 Describe the purpose of frames and how frames relate to each other if it
is not obvious by frame titles alone.
And if you use forms (Priority 2)
10.2 Until user agents support explicit associations between labels and form
controls, for all form controls with implicitly associated labels, ensure that
the label is properly positioned.
12.4 Associate labels explicitly with their controls.
And if you use applets and scripts (Priority 2)
6.4 For scripts and applets, ensure that event handlers are input
device-independent.
7.3 Until user agents allow users to freeze moving content, avoid movement in
pages.
8.1 Make programmatic elements such as scripts and applets directly
accessible or compatible with assistive technologies [Priority 1 if
functionality is important and not presented elsewhere, otherwise Priority 2.]
9.2 Ensure that any element that has its own interface can be operated in a
device-independent manner.
9.3 For scripts, specify logical event handlers rather than device-dependent
event handlers.
Priority 3 checkpoints
In General (Priority 3)
4.2 Specify the expansion of each abbreviation or acronym in a document where
it first occurs.
4.3 Identify the primary natural language of a document.
9.4 Create a logical tab order through links, form controls, and objects.
9.5 Provide keyboard shortcuts to important links (including those in
client-side image maps), form controls, and groups of form controls.
10.5 Until user agents (including assistive technologies) render adjacent
links distinctly, include non-link, printable characters (surrounded by spaces)
between adjacent links.
11.3 Provide information so that users may receive documents according to
their preferences (e.g., language, content type, etc.)
13.5 Provide navigation bars to highlight and give access to the navigation
mechanism.
13.6 Group related links, identify the group (for user agents), and, until
user agents do so, provide a way to bypass the group.
13.7 If search functions are provided, enable different types of searches for
different skill levels and preferences.
13.8 Place distinguishing information at the beginning of headings,
paragraphs, lists, etc.
13.9 Provide information about document collections (i.e., documents
comprising multiple pages.).
13.10 Provide a means to skip over multi-line ASCII art.
14.2 Supplement text with graphic or auditory presentations where they will
facilitate comprehension of the page.
14.3 Create a style of presentation that is consistent across pages.
And if you use images and image maps (Priority 3)
1.5 Until user agents render text equivalents for client-side image map
links, provide redundant text links for each active region of a client-side
image map.
And if you use tables (Priority 3)
5.5 Provide summaries for tables.
5.6 Provide abbreviations for header labels.
10.3 Until user agents (including assistive technologies) render side-by-side
text correctly, provide a linear text alternative (on the current page or some
other) for all tables that lay out text in parallel, word-wrapped columns.
And if you use forms (Priority 3)
10.4 Until user agents handle empty controls correctly, include default,
place-holding characters in edit boxes and text areas.
[60] EC Communication "eEurope
2002: Accessibility of Public Web Sites and their Content", adopted on 25
September 2001, states that ensuring availability of accessible public Web sites
and their
content will be furthered by adoption by the 15 EU member states of the Web
Accessibility Initiative (WAI) Guidelines (WCAG 1.0) for public Web sites by the
end of 2001. See also, European Commission, "Information Providers
Guidelines" <http://europa.eu.int/comm/ipg/index_en.htm>.
[61] Section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act (29 U.S.C. 794d), as amended by the Workforce Investment Act
of 1998 (P.L. 105-220). Electronic and Information Technology of the United
States <http://www.section508.gov >.
[62] Guide to the Section 508
Standards for Electronic and Information Technology <http://www.access-board.gov/sec508/guide/index.htm>.
Overview of Technical Standards (Subpart B)
The standards provide criteria specific to various types of technologies,
including:
- software applications
and operating systems
- web-based information
or applications
- telecommunication
products
- video and multimedia
products
- self contained,
closed products (e.g., information kiosks, calculators, and fax machines)
- desktop and portable
computers
Software Applications and Operating Systems (1194.21)
Most of the specifications for software pertain to usability for people with
vision impairments. For example, one provision requires alternative keyboard
navigation, which is essential for people with vision impairments who cannot
rely on pointing devices, such as a mouse. Other provisions address animated
displays, color and contrast settings, flash rate, and electronic forms, among
others.
Web-based Intranet and Internet Information and Applications (1194.22)
The criteria for web-based technology and information are based on access
guidelines developed by the Web Accessibility Initiative of the World Wide Web
Consortium. Many of these provisions ensure access for people with vision
impairments who rely on various assistive products to access computer-based
information, such as screen readers, which translate what's on a computer screen
into automated audible output, and refreshable Braille displays. Certain
conventions, such as verbal tags or identification of graphics and format
devices, like frames, are necessary so that these devices can "read" them for
the user in a sensible way. The standards do not prohibit the use of web site
graphics or animation. Instead, the standards aim to ensure that such
information is also available in an accessible format. Generally, this means use
of text labels or descriptors for graphics and certain format elements. (HTML
code already provides an "Alt Text" tag for graphics which can serve as a verbal
descriptor for graphics). This section also addresses the usability of
multimedia presentations, image maps, style sheets, scripting languages, applets
and plug-ins, and electronic forms.
The standards apply to Federal web sites but not to private sector web sites
(unless a site is provided under contract to a Federal agency, in which case
only that web site or portion covered by the contract would have to comply).
Accessible sites offer significant advantages that go beyond access. For
example, those with "text-only" options provide a faster downloading alternative
and can facilitate transmission of web-based data to cell phones and personal
digital assistants.
Telecommunications Products (1194.23)
The criteria of this section are designed primarily to ensure access to
people who are deaf or hard of hearing. This includes compatibility with hearing
aids, cochlear implants, assistive listening devices, and TTYs. TTYs are devices
that enable people with hearing or speech impairments to communicate over the
telephone; they typically include an acoustic coupler for the telephone handset,
a simplified keyboard, and a visible message display. One requirement calls for
a standard non-acoustic TTY connection point for telecommunication products that
allow voice communication but that do provide TTY functionality. Other
specifications address adjustable volume controls for output, product interface
with hearing technologies, and the usability of keys and controls by people who
may have impaired vision or limited dexterity or motor control.
Video or Multimedia Products (1194.24)
Multimedia products involve more than one media and include, but are not
limited to, video programs, narrated slide production, and computer generated
presentations. Provisions address caption decoder circuitry (for any system with
a screen larger than 13 inches) and secondary audio channels for television
tuners, including tuner cards for use in computers. The standards also require
captioning and audio description for certain training and informational
multimedia productions developed or procured by Federal agencies. The standards
also provide that display or presentation of alternate text or audio
descriptions shall be user-selectable unless permanent.
Self Contained, Closed Products (1194.25)
This section covers products that generally have imbedded software but are
often designed in such a way that a user cannot easily attach or install
assistive technology. Examples include information kiosks, information
transaction machines, copiers, printers, calculators, fax machines, and similar
types of products. The standards require that access features be built into the
system so users do not have to attach an assistive device to it. Other
specifications address mechanisms for private listening (handset or a standard
headphone jack), touch screens, auditory output and adjustable volume controls,
and location of controls in accessible reach ranges.
Desktop and Portable Computers (1194.26)
This section focuses on keyboards and other mechanically operated controls,
touch screens, use of biometric form of identification, and ports and
connectors.
Functional Performance Criteria (Subpart C)
The performance requirements of this section are intended for overall product
evaluation and for technologies or components for which there is no specific
requirement under the technical standards in Subpart B. These criteria are
designed to ensure that the individual accessible components work together to
create an accessible product. They cover operation, including input and control
functions, operation of mechanical mechanisms, and access to visual and audible
information. These provisions are structured to allow people with sensory or
physical disabilities to locate, identify, and operate input, control and
mechanical functions and to access the information provided, including text,
static or dynamic images, icons, labels, sounds or incidental operating cues.
Information, Documentation, and Support (Subpart D)
The standards also address access to all information, documentation, and
support provided to end users (e.g., Federal employees) of covered technologies.
This includes user guides, installation guides for end-user installable devices,
and customer support and technical support communications. Such information must
be available in alternate formats upon request at no additional charge.
Alternate formats or methods of communication, can include Braille, cassette
recordings, large print, electronic text, Internet postings, TTY access, and
captioning and audio description for video materials.
[63]Web-based Intranet and
Internet Information and Applications (1194.22): (a) Text Tags, (b) Multimedia
Presentations, (c) Color, (d) Readability, (e) Serve-Side Image Maps, (f)
Client-Side Image Maps, (g)&(h) Data Tables, (i) Frames, (j) Flicker Rate,
(k) Text-Only Alternative, (l) Scripts, (m) Applets and Plug-Ins, (n)
Electronic Forms, (o) Navigation Links, (p) Time Delays <http://www.access-board.gov/sec508/guide/1194.22.htm>
[64] <http://jimthatcher.com/
>.
[65] "Developer guidelines" <http://www-3.ibm.com/able/guidelines.html>.
[66] <
http://www.worldenable.net/manila2003/DesignRecommendations.htm>.
[67] <
http://www.worldenable.net/manila2003/Default.htm>.
[68] Universal Design is based
on seven principles: (1) Equitable use -- the design is useful and
relevant to a wide group of users; (2) Flexibility in use -- the design
accommodates a wide range of individual preferences and abilities;
(3) Simple and intuitive use -- the design is easy to understand regardless of
the knowledge, experience, language skills or concentration level of the user;
(4) Perceptive information -- the design communicates information effectively to
the user regardless of the ambient condition or the sensory abilities of the
user; (5) Tolerance for error -- the design minimizes the hazards and adverse
consequences of unintended actions of the user; (6) Low physical effort -- the
design can be used easily, efficiently and comfortably with a minimum of
fatigue; and (7) Size and space for approach and use -- the size and space for
approach, reach, manipulation and use should be appropriate regardless of the
body size, posture or mobility of the user. See "Report" of International
Seminar on Environmental Accessibility; planning and design of accessible urban
development in developing countries (Beirut, 30 November -- 3 December 1999) <http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/disisea3.htm>.
The following premises are associated with Universal Design: (a) varying ability
is not a special condition of the few but a common characteristic of being human
and we change physically and intellectually throughout out lives; (b) if a
design works well for people with disabilities, it works better for everyone;
(c) at any point in our lives, personal self-esteem, identity, and well-being
are deeply affected by our ability to function in our physical surroundings with
a sense of comfort, independence and control; and (d) usability and aesthetics
are mutually compatible <
http://www.adaptenv.org/universal/index.php >.
[69] "Usability" refers to the
quality of a user's experience when interacting with a product or system --
whether a Web site, a software application, mobile technology, or any
user-operated device.
Several factors can affect the user's experience with a product or system,
which include:
-
Ease of learning: How fast can a user who has never seen the user interface
before learn to use it sufficiently well to accomplish basic tasks?
-
Efficiency of use: Once an experienced user has learned to use the
system, how fast can he or she accomplish tasks?
-
Memorability: If a user has used the system before, can he or she
remember enough to use it effectively the next time or does the user have to
start over again learning everything?
-
Error frequency and severity: How often do users make errors while
using the system, how serious are these errors, and how do users recover from
these errors?
-
Subjective satisfaction: How much does the user like using the system?
In Usability Basics <http://www.usability.gov/basics/index.html>.
[70] <http://www.braillenet.org/accessibilite/livreblanc/accessibilite.html
>.
[71] Cynthia D. Waddell,
JD. "The Growing Digital Divide in Access for People with Disabilities:
overcoming barriers to participation" (1999), p. 2 at
< http://www.icdri.org/CynthiaW/the_digital-divide.htm
>.
[72] Cynthia D. Waddell,
"Overview of Law and Guidelines," Chap. 2 in Jim Thatcher et al.,
Constructing Accessible Web Sites, (Birmingham (UK) Glasshaus, 2002);
republished July 2003 (San Francisco CA (USA) Apress) <http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=342>.
[73] Leo Valdes, "Accessibility
on the Internet" (1998-2003) <http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/disacc00.htm>.
[74] Leo Valdes, "Making
Internet and Communications Technologies Accessible (2003) <http://www.worldenable.net/manila2003/MatC2a.htm>.
[75] An Intranet is a network
within an organization that uses Internet technologies to enable users to find,
use, and share documents and Web pages. Corporations use intranets to
communicate with employees. Intranets use traditional Internet protocols,
TCP/IP and HTTP to transfer data. They usually reside behind firewalls, for
security, and are not limited by physical location. Intranets can link users to
the outside Internet, and with proper security in place may use public networks
to transfer data. <
http://guide.darwinmag.com/technology/web/intranet/index.html>.
[76] An Extranet is a private
network that uses the Internet protocol and the public telecommunication system
to securely share part of a business's information or operations with suppliers,
vendors, partners, customers, or other businesses. An extranet can be viewed as
part of a company's intranet that is extended to users outside the organization.
<http://www.doc.govt.nz/Community/Extranet/index.asp
>.
[77] A Portal is an internal
Website that provides proprietary corporate information to employees as well as
access to selected websites, such as those of suppliers. Individuals or user
groups are given the ability to customize the portal page, which includes a
search engine for internal documents. <
http://guide.darwinmag.com/technology/web/intranet/index.html>. See
also Jim Rapoza, "Portals & Knowledge Management". eWeek (5 April 2004) <http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1559915,00.asp>.
[78] Disabled Peoples
Association of Singapore, "PCs and the Disabled" <
http://www.dpa.org.sg/DPA/pcknowhow.htm>.
[79] Center for Assistive
Technologies home page <
http://cat.buffalo.edu/ >; Foundation for Assistive Technology home page <
http://www.fastuk.org/ >; Assistive
Technology Centre home page <http://assist-tech.ednet.ns.ca/
>.
[80] Peter Blake, "A Review of
Free, Online Accessibility Tools" (February 2004) <http://www.webaim.org/techniques/articles/freetools/>.
[81] <
http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html>.
[82] The Common Gateway
Interface (CGI) is a standard for interfacing external applications with
information servers, such as HTTP or Web servers. A plain HTML document
that the Web daemon retrieves is static, while a CGI program is executed in
real-time and can output dynamic information <http://hoohoo.ncsa.uiuc.edu/cgi/intro.html>.
[83] "Search Engine Submission
Tips" <
http://searchenginewatch.com/webmasters/index.php>.
[84] Opera Software, "Authoring
for Small-Screen Rendering (SSR)" <http://www.opera.com/products/smartphone/dev/>;
and "Making Small Devices Look Great" <http://my.opera.com/community/dev/device/
>.
[85] Debra Donston, "Web access
for all". eWeek (May 19, 2003) pp. 54-57 <http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1090387,00.asp>.
[86] "Implementation of the
World Programme of Action concerning Disabled Persons; report of the
Secretary-General" (A/54/388 and Add.1), Addendum I. Analytical review of
progress in equalization of opportunities by, for and with persons with
disabilities:
20. The strategic plan [for Internet accessibility] had five main points:
(a) Vision: formulation of a shared vision for the Internet accessibility
initiative was important for building awareness and a general consensus for
first principles and for changes envisaged concerning the ways in which social
development information goods would be presented through Internet technologies.
The vision identified entailed provision of timely and relevant accessible
social development information goods for all; and the title of the site was
identified as "Gateway for social policy and development";
(b) Scope and priorities: the time-frame for design, testing and
implementation of a functional Internet site that would meet generally accepted
international standards -- February to May 1998 -- was tight. The scope of the
Gateway initiative was, first, provision of accessible information goods for
persons with disabilities. The second concern was design of accessible
Internet-based services to support two priority observances in the social
development field: the 1999 International Year of Older Persons, and
preparations for the special session of the General Assembly to consider the
outcome of the World Summit for Social Development. The initiative focused on
Internet accessibility for all, with reference to specific priorities of the
global social development programme of the United Nations;
(c) Feasibility and strategic components: the time-frame for the Gateway
initiative required selection, testing and rapid application of best-available
accessibility concepts and design tools rather than extensive comparative
studies of emerging practices and technologies. An important contribution to the
initiative was the provision by the Microsoft Corporation in early 1998 of a
compact disk read-only memory (CD-ROM) compilation of Internet accessibility
design concepts and tools. A great deal of relevant material was also identified
on the Internet. Chief among the sites consulted were the World Wide Web
Consortium and its "Web Content Accessibility Guidelines", and the Center for
Applied Special Technology and its on-line Web accessibility evaluation tool,
"Bobby" (http://www.cast.org). Since the Gateway initiative for Internet
accessibility was being implemented within the framework of the Internet site of
the United Nations (http://www.un.org), strategic components of the Gateway were
designed to fit within the basic Internet architecture of the United Nations
site consistent with universal Web design standards and relevant accessibility
guidelines. Excellent cooperation was obtained at departmental level of the
United Nations Secretariat. Critiques of Gateway designs and structures came
from a diverse set of beta testers, representing all specialized programme
constituencies: governmental, non-governmental and civil society;
(d) Implementation plan: the Internet accessibility initiative was outsourced
to an international consultant team with considerable expertise in
communications planning, Internet design, systems integration and training. The
international consultant team prepared a prototype Web design within two weeks
of joining the project and made effective and strategic use of communications
technologies to meet the schedule of deliverables set by the Division for Social
Policy and Development. The decision to outsource was taken since the Gateway
would be the first Internet presence in the United Nations system planned and
designed in accordance with generally acceptable standards for accessible Web
design;
(e) Monitoring and evaluation: the Internet accessibility pilot project had a
tight schedule for design and implementation and was carried out by an
international consultant team. A critical task was joint determination of
critical milestones for conceptual designs, for delivery of content by the
concerned substantive specialists, for coordination with the concerned technical
services and for systematic feedback on design options from beta testers
representative of the specialized constituencies for the global social
development programme of the United Nations. For instance, a proposed design for
the International Year of Older Persons Web site was positively critiqued by a
concerned governmental representative, albeit with a reminder of the need for
accessible language support. Critiques from persons with disabilities served to
make the Persons with Disabilities Web site easy and efficient to navigate with
text browsers. Design options were evaluated continually using on-line tools to
assess compatibility with various Internet browsers, communications capacities
and universal design principles. The May delivery of the release candidate of an
operational "Gateway for social policy and development" was accompanied by an
intensive user orientation and training session to promote awareness of
sustainable Web accessibility in the social development field. <http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/disa54e6.htm>.
Return to top
Previous
Next |
