BS 8878 and the Holistic Approaches to Web Accessibility
Download as PPT, PDF2 likes1,631 views
The document discusses web accessibility with a focus on the limitations and challenges of existing models, particularly WAI guidelines, and advocates for a holistic approach to accessibility. It emphasizes the need for user-centered design, stakeholder involvement, and the integration of accessibility into broader organizational policies and practices. Additionally, it introduces BS 8878, a user-focused code of practice aimed at improving web accessibility standards by proposing a flexible, context-aware framework for implementation.
![Limitations of Our Work Our holistic approach to Web accessibility: Developed by researchers and practitioners High visibility amongst accessibility researchers But: Little engagement with standardisation bodies Limited engagement with policy makers or accessibility organisations: Accessibility Summits in 2004 & 2006 Holistic Approaches Difficulties in embedding approaches in organisation’s policies due to lack of visibility to policy-makers (who may only have heard of WCAG) “ the government is following highly specific [WCAG] points. Some work, some don't," said Kevin Carey, Vice-Chair of the RNIB & director of digital inclusion charity HumanITy .”](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/holistic-accessibility-110225025653-phpapp01/85/BS-8878-and-the-Holistic-Approaches-to-Web-Accessibility-25-320.jpg)
BS 8878 and the Holistic Approaches to Web Accessibility
- 1. BS 8878 and the Holistic Approaches to Web Accessibility Brian Kelly UKOLN University of Bath Bath, UK UKOLN is supported by: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/web-focus/events/meetings/cetis-accessibility-sig-2011-02/ This work is licensed under a Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 licence (but note caveat) Acceptable Use Policy Recording this talk, taking photographs, discussing the talk using Twitter, IM, etc. is permitted if distractions to others are minimised. Blog: http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/ Twitter: @briankelly @ukwebfocus
- 2. About Me Brian Kelly: UK Web Focus: national advisory post to UK HEIs Long-standing Web evangelist Based at UKOLN at the University of Bath Attended WAI launch in 1997 Author of several papers on Web accessibility Speaker at TechShare & W4A conferences UKOLN: A national centre of expertise in digital information management A JISC Innovation Support Centre Introduction
- 3. About This Talk Contents: Web accessibility and WAI Awareness of limitations Towards a solution: Holistic approaches Achievable approaches Contextual approaches Embedded approaches Development elsewhere Application of holistic approaches Where are we now? Next steps Introduction
- 4. About WAI WAI has been successful in raising awareness of Web accessibility and providing guidelines to achieve this. WAI guidelines are based on: WCAG (Web Content …) ATAG (Authoring Tools ..) UAAG (User Agents …) The model is simple to grasp. But is it appropriate for the future? Does model: Reflect the diversity of users & user environments Reflect the diversity of Web usage Reflect real-world technical environment & developments Reflect real-world political & cultural environments Web Accessibility & WAI Slide from talk at W4A 2005
- 5. Limitations of the Model This model: Requires all three components to be implemented in order for the WAI vision to be achieved Is of limited use to end users who have no control over browser or authoring tools developments Is confusing – as many think WCAG is WAI How does this model address: Delays in full conformance? (We're still waiting for " until user agents … " clause to be resolved) Real-world reluctance to deploy new software (issues of inertia, testing, costs, …) Real world complexities (resources, users, …) Is there a plan B in case this model fails to ever take off? Is it desirable to base legal requirements on an unproven theoretical framework? Slide from talk at W4A 2005 Web Accessibility & WAI
- 6. WCAG 1.0 Limitations Certain Priority 2 and 3 guidelines cause concerns: 11.1 Use W3C technologies when they are available and appropriate for a task ... Promotes own technologies Appears to ignore major improvements in accessibility of non-W3C formats 11.1 … and use the latest versions when supported Goes against project management guidelines Logical absurdity: when XHTML 1 came out WAI AA HTML 4 compliant sites downgraded to A! 3.2 Create documents that validate to published formal grammars Dodgy HTML (<br />) can be rendered by browsers – this is an interoperability issue Slide from talk at W4A 2005 Web Accessibility & WAI
- 7. Nitpicking? “ This is just nit-picking! WCAG is valuable – don’t knock it! ” WCAG is valuable, but we need to: Build a robust framework for the future Ensure clarity and avoid ambiguities to avoid different interpretations Reflect on experiences gained since 1999 Avoid dangers of inappropriate case law being set Web Accessibility & WAI Slide from talk at W4A 2005 Nightmare Scenario Case taken to court in UK. Defence lawyers point out ambiguities & inconsistencies. Case lost, resulting in WCAG’s relevance being diminished.
- 8. Holistic Web Accessibility Kelly, Phipps & Swift 1 argued for a holistic framework for e-learning accessibility This framework: Focusses on the needs of the learner Requires accessible learning outcomes , not necessarily e-learning resources This approach reflects current UK emphasis on blended learning (rather than e-learning) 1 Developing A Holistic Approach For E-Learning Accessibility , Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 2004, Vol. 30, Issue 3 Holistic Approaches Slide from talk at W4A 2005
- 9. Legal Issues UK legislation requires organisations to take " reasonable measures " to ensure disabled people do not face unjustified discrimination. This approach: Is technology-neutral Is both forwards-looking and backwards-compatible Acknowledges differences across providers of services Doesn’t differentiate between real-world and online accessibility (or between Web and other IT accessibility) Avoids change-control difficulties The approach outlined in this paper appears to fit in well with UK legislation Holistic Approaches Slide from talk at W4A 2005
- 10. Universal Access? PO U R? Normal Cancer Man against snow, Austrian Tirol 1974, reproduced with permission of the photographer: Professor Paul Hill The Great Masturbator by Salvador Dali (1929) The Duck-Rabbit CRAFT BREWERY
- 11. Second Life: User Perspective A video clip shows Judith, a user with cerebral palsy, using Second Life with a headwand. “ Do you think that this will be a really useful tool for people who are unable to get around, who have problems of mobility in real life? ” “ Yes, because you can have friends without having to go out and physically find them ”. The danger is that organisations will ban SL as they feel if fails to comply with accessibility guidelines.
- 12. Stakeholder Model Common approach: Focus on Web author Sometimes user involved Sometimes led by policy-makers This approach: Often results in lack of sustainability Web accessibility regarded as ‘techie’ Not integrated with wider accessibility issues Not integrated with training, development, … There’s a real need to integrate approaches to accessibility more closely with (diversity of) service providers Slide from talk at W4A 2007 Developed by Jane Seale, Southampton University
- 13. Accessibility 2.0 Need to build on WAI’s successes, whilst articulating a more sophisticated approach. Accessibility 2.0: User-focussed : It’s about satisfying user’s needs Rich set of stakeholders : More than the author and the user Always beta : Accessibility is hard, so we’re continually learning Flexibility : There’s not a single solution for all use cases Diversity : There’s also diversity in society’s views on accessibility (e.g. widening participation, not universal accessibility) Blended solutions : Focus on ‘accessibility’ and not just ‘Web accessibility’ Scalable : Applicable for large nos. of resources Slide from talk at W4A 2007
- 14. Kevin Kelly
- 15. Repositories – Case Study Discussion on repositories list: “ Why PDFs of research papers? What about accessibility? ” “ Important battle is open access. Let’s not add extra complexities. ” My response: Open access is important (and PDF is easy) but let’s also: Engage with various stakeholders (incl. publishers) Develop (holistic) policies Explore other options to enhance accessibility And I found Scribd – a Web 2.0 services which creates MP3 from MS Word/PDF: Enhanced accessibility from MS Word master & Flash interface Slide from talk at W4A 2007
- 16. Putting The User First The way we were The rules The solution The user Example “ UK Government requires all government Web sites to comply with WCAG AA” Web Adaptability Slide from talk at OzeWAI09 The context The user The solution The guidelines Where we should be Example Involve user in design process Recognise the context Then seek to apply guidelines
- 17. Web Adaptability Framework The framework embraces: The intended use of the service The intended audience The available resources Technical innovations Organisational policies Definitions of accessibility … Alternative to a one-size-fit-all approach To avoid adaptability meaning doing whatever you fancy (e.g. IE-only sites) adaptation needs to be implemented in context of a legal framework, reasonable measures, expectations,… Slide from talk at OzeWAI09 Web Adaptability Reasonable Measures
- 18. A Grammatical Perspective WAI approach: Accessibility a characteristic of resource WAI provides best practices for resource; creation of resource & processing of resource Accessibility apply to all (all resources must be universally accessible) No context: Scope Audience Costs … understand (All) People understand (all) Web resources Subject – verb – object Resource
- 19. A Grammatical Perspective Holistic approach Accessibility a characteristic of user’s engagement Processes of engagement go beyond understanding Accessibility focusses on target user community Mechanisms for engagement go beyond Web browser John learns from Web resource Jill appreciates non-Web resource Jim is entertained by Web resource Subject – verb – object Resource Resource Resource
- 20. Who’s Using These Approaches? (1) Public library example: Presentation at national Public Library event “ And here’s a Flash-based game we’ve developed. Easy to do, and the kids love it” “ What about accessibility?” “ Oh, er. We’ll remove it before the new legislation becomes into force” Blended approach: “ What’s the purpose of the game?” “ To keep kids amused for 10 mins, while parents get books” “ How about building blocks or a bouncy castle as an alternative? This is an alternative approach to problem, which doesn’t focus on disabilities” Web Adaptability Slide from talk at OzeWAI09
- 21. Who’s Using These Approaches? (2a) Tate’s i-Map project: early example of an award-winning approach to providing access to paintings for visual impaired users Note this work was described in an award-winning paper on “ Implementing A Holistic Approach To E-Learning Accessibility ” paper by Kelly, Phipps and Howell (2005) Slide from talk at OzeWAI09 It used Flash ..! … to allow users to ‘participate’ in the creation of the painting
- 22. Who’s Using These Approaches? (2b) I-Map project also used a blended approach, through provision of access to raised images Slide from talk at OzeWAI09
- 23. Who’s Using These Approaches? (3) Wolverhampton Art Gallery are using a user-focused development approach to providing access to information about Bantcock House Yes, it uses YouTube Deaf users involved in design processes (e.g. benefits of signers in context of museum) Slide from talk at OzeWAI09
- 24. Other Developments WCAG 2.0: Published in Dec 2008 Addressed flaws in WCAG 2.0 – but still needs to be contextualised Other accessibility standardisation work: Standards & best practices for various formats e.g. PDFs; MS Office; … AccessForAll and MARC21: Metadata frameworks for defining & describing resource accessibility in Web and Library contexts Elsewhere
- 25. Limitations of Our Work Our holistic approach to Web accessibility: Developed by researchers and practitioners High visibility amongst accessibility researchers But: Little engagement with standardisation bodies Limited engagement with policy makers or accessibility organisations: Accessibility Summits in 2004 & 2006 Holistic Approaches Difficulties in embedding approaches in organisation’s policies due to lack of visibility to policy-makers (who may only have heard of WCAG) “ the government is following highly specific [WCAG] points. Some work, some don't," said Kevin Carey, Vice-Chair of the RNIB & director of digital inclusion charity HumanITy .”
- 26. About BS 8878 BS 8878 Web Accessibility Code of Practice: Published in December 2010 Pragmatic & user-focussed: aims to escape from being “ caught in a rut of technical guidelines ” Key points from BS 8878 Webinar: Covers ‘Web products’ and not just Web sites (including Flash; mobile; Web email; …). A code of practice which gives guidance (could, should, …) rather than detailed technical specs. Possible to comply if recommendations implemented (e.g. document processes & policies). Applicable to all types of organisations. A more strategic & high level approach than WCAG BS 8878
- 27. BS 8878 & Holistic Approach BS 8878 is based on 16 steps: 1,2 Define purpose and audience 3 Analyse needs of target audience 4 Note any platform or technology preferences 5,6 Define relationship product will have with its target audience & user goals and tasks 7 Consider the degree of user experience the web product will aim to provide 8 Consider inclusive design & user-personalised approaches to accessibility BS 8878
- 28. BS 8878 & Holistic Approach 9 Choose the delivery platform to support 10 Choose the target browsers, operating systems & assistive technologies to support 11 Choose whether to create or procure web product. 12 Define the web technologies to be used in the web product 13 Use Web guidelines to direct accessibility web production 14 Assure the web products accessibility through production (i.e. at all stages) 15 Communicate the web product’s accessibility decisions at launch 16 Plan to assure accessibility in all post-launch updates to the product BS 8878 e.g. WCAG
- 29. Holistic Accessibility (1) In W4A 2010 paper we gave this summary: Reasonable Measures : Rather than regarding WCAG conformance as a mandatory requirement, WCAG should be regarded as guidelines, which may be ignored if their use conflicts with other requirements – so long as steps are taken to address the potential exclusion that may result. Justification of Costs : ‘Reasonable measures’ should include identification of costs of conforming with accessibility guidelines. … Provision of Alternatives : If it is too costly or difficult to conform with accessibility guidelines, the provision of alternatives that are as equivalent as possible may be an appropriate solution. Holistic Accessibility
- 30. Holistic Accessibility (2 of 3) Just-in-time Accessibility : A requirement that all resources conform to WCAG is a ‘just-in-case’ solution. This … but may be inappropriate if resources are expected to be little used. Advocacy, Education and Training : Those involved in supporting content providers and other stakeholders should ensure that education and training on best practices is provided, together with advocacy on the needs for such best practices. Sharing and Learning : With an emphasis on a community-based approach to the development of appropriate solutions it is important that best practices are widely shared. Holistic Accessibility
- 31. Holistic Accessibility (3 of 3) Engagement of Users with Disabilities : The need to ensure that disabled people are included in the design and development of Web solutions must be emphasised. Focus on ‘Accessibility’ rather than ‘Web Accessibility’ : The benefits of Web/IT solutions to real world accessibility difficulties needs to be considered. As described above, amplified events can address difficulties in travel and access, even though the technologies used may not conform with accessibility guidelines. Holistic Accessibility
- 32. But What Do I Do? Need for case studies to show appropriate approaches Case Study 1: Institutional Repositories Purpose : Enhance access to research papers to research community Challenge : Papers are user-generated content typically using publishers template. Appropriate solutions : These could include: Education for researchers on why and how Discussions with publishers on enhancements to templates (ALT text for logos; linearisable columns; ..) Development of accessible cover sheets Systematic automated monitoring of trends “ Problems with this resources” button: to provide feedback … Next Steps
- 33. But What Do I Do? Case Study 2: Amplified Events Purpose : Enhance access to conferences for remote and time-shifted audiences Challenge : Expense of captioning. Use of freely available 3 rd party tools (e.g. Twitter). Privacy. Appropriate solutions : These could include: Purpose is to enhance accessibility of real world event Crowd-sourcing captions using Twitter and iTitle Automated speech-to-text possible in the future Policies on openness “ Quiet zone” for those who don’t want to be videoed Development of netiquette on what is private and only accessible to local audience … Next Steps
- 34. Conclusions We seem to have: An understanding of the limitations of the one-size-fits-all approach Close harmony between researchers and policy makers and standards developers An opportunity to promote such best practices Challenges: How to proceed next How to develop appropriate policies How to commission appropriate solutions Next Steps
- 35. Questions Any questions or comments?
Editor's Notes
- #12: A video clip shows Judith, a user with cerebral palsy, using Second Life with a headwand. She was asked: “ Do you think that this will be a really useful tool for people who are unable to get around, who have problems of mobility in real life? ” Her response was “ Yes, because you can have friends without having to go out and physically find them ”. There is a danger that organisations will ban Second Life as they feel if fails to comply with accessibility guidelines. This would deprive users such as Judith of the benefits they seek.