 |
 |
 |
 |
Electronic Accessibility:
United States and International
Perspectives
Abstract
http://elearn.hr.swt.edu/nutshell.htmBruce Coonce, shown above, is a visually impaired Student Development Specialist employed at Southwest Texas State University. In the link given below his photo, Bruce presents several audio clips describing typical problems encountered by people who use a machine reader to provide voice descriptions from web sites. When reading an inaccessible site, a machine reader rapidly sounds out the complete web site address (the URL) repeatedly before stating the file name for each graphic image. In contrast, on an accessible site, the machine reader states the URL only once and then reads aloud the alternative text descriptions of the images (supplied by the web designer). For example, the file name of Bruce’s photo above is Bruce.jpg. Since this site is designed to be accessible, the machine reader will state the URL only once and then sound out the descriptive title - a blind man. Note that when you place your cursor on Bruce’s picture, the words "a blind man" appear. If this were an inaccessible site, Bruce.jpg, would have appeared instead.
Introduction
This article provides guidance on the issue of universal web accessibility. Lack of information concerning web accessibility not only contributes to the digital divide, but can lead to serious legal problems as well. Lawsuits can arise because of U.S. legislation that required all web sites receiving federal funds to meet accessibility directives by the spring of 2001. The goal of this paper is to provide clarification of the accessibility statutes and offer resources and information to assist in successfully developing accessible web sites.
The circular process of comparing and contrasting information from the Internet, expert testimony and personal expertise were the primary components fueling the engine of this qualitative inquiry. It goes without saying that constant and rapid change makes it extremely difficult to study any phenomenon on the Internet.
Early efforts in this study to understand accessibility issues began with telephone interviews. One of the first people contacted was Martin Bayne, who has the moniker, Mr. Long-Term Care. He is an international expert and advocate for quality health care for seniors who face physical challenges (http://216.150.16.116/about/about.cfm). Bayne frequently works long days in spite of his own battle with Parkinson's disease. He stated that only about 1% of all web sites are universally accessible, including health care sites (Bayne, 1999). Bayne recommended that our next source be Kynn Bartlett for additional historical information.
Kynn Bartlett, a leader in the field of web accessibility, advocates quality web design to build an effective World Wide Web that can be used by everyone (Barlett, 1999). As president of the HTML Writers Guild (http://www.hwg.org/), he directed the growth of the Guild from a collection of mailing lists into an effective, active organization with more than 117,000 members from 150 nations. He continues to teach the Guild's online course, Designing for Universal Accessibility (http://www.hwg.org/services/classes/). Bartlett also volunteers as the director of the Guild's Accessible Web Authoring Resources and Education (AWARE http://www.awarecenter.org/community/ ). He heralded the seminal work done by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C).
In October 1994, Tim Berners-Lee, originator of the Web (1989) founded the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) in collaboration with CERN (European Organization for Nuclear Research http://www.cern.ch/). The World Wide Web Consortium was created to provide leadership for the Web by developing common protocols that promote its evolution and ensure its interoperability. W3C has a membership of more than 500 member organizations from around the world and has earned international recognition for its contributions to the development of the Web.
W3C's commitment to lead the Web includes promoting a high degree of usability for people with disabilities. The W3C Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI), in coordination with global organizations, is pursuing accessibility of the Web through five primary areas: technology, guidelines, tools, education and outreach, and research and development.
Nearly one out of five individuals has a disability. (Waddell & Thomason, K., 1998.) Many web developers are ignoring the accessibility issue or just do not know how to make their sites universally accessible. They are bewildered in the face of the vast amount of information available on applying accessibility techniques to the design of their web sites.
Four categories of information facilitate understanding the complexity of the issues. These categories are:
- U.S. legal mandates;
- International accessibility policy and legislation;
- Resources and information; and
- Web site accessibility validation
These four areas provide the tools for meeting today’s challenges. As the Web evolves, new accessibility issues will emerge. Once you think you have it figured out, it will change, requiring continual self-study to keep abreast of the how these changes effect your situation.
The Legal Mandates for Accessible Internet Sites
The Americans and Disability Act (ADA), which was signed in 1990, prohibits discrimination “on the basis of disability in employment, programs and services provided by state and local governments, goods and services provided by private companies and in commercial facilities.” However, the ADA doesn't just apply to the physical world. Waddell (1998) points out that according to the Justice Department, the ADA also applies to cyberspace. In an opinion letter dated September 9, 1996, The Justice Department stressed that covered entities under the ADA are required to provide effective communication, regardless of whether they generally communicate through print media, audio media or computerized media such as the Internet. Covered entities that use the Internet for communications regarding their programs, goods or services must be prepared to offer those communications through accessible means as well.
Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1999 provided the basis for the Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards, enacted August 7, 1998. "Effective (two) years after the date of enactment, any individual with a disability may file a complaint alleging that a federal agency fails to comply with section 508 in providing accessible electronic and information technology.”
Public Law 106-246, signed by President Clinton on July 13, 2000, defers the effective date for enforcement of Section 508. As originally enacted in 1998, the provisions of Section 508 relating to enforcement were to go into effect on August 7, 2000. The new amendment (H.R. 4425, Section 2405) changes the effective date to six months after the Access Board publishes its final standards under Section 50 (McDunn, R. 2001).
On June 25, 2001, the accessibility requirements for United States electronic and information technology took effect under Section 508. This law mandates that this technology be accessible according to standards developed by the Access Board, which are now part of the federal government’s procurement regulations. Section 508 and its enforcement provisions apply to products procured by United States federal agencies after the June 25th. This law relies heavily on the procurement process to make sure there is compliance with the new standards. Compliance with the standards is required unless it would pose an "undue burden"—as defined in the standards—or if no complying product is commercially available. The law permits individuals with disabilities to file a complaint with the appropriate federal agency concerning access to products procured after the effective date.
"Although the rule was written primarily to aid federal employees and those who use federal web sites, state institutions are also required to comply with Section 508, because all states receive money under the Assistive Technology Act. “Section 508 is the A.D.A. of cyberspace,” says Cynthia Waddell, an expert on disability law and information technology. In 1998, Waddell cautioned that educational institutions are now facing web accessibility issues. "Library reference services are being transformed by the efficiency of Internet access to information systems and search engines. Professors are teaching long-distance learning courses over the Internet and, even if a student is physically in class, homework assignments and resources are being posted on class home pages. Yet, even if a library terminal has assistive computer technology installed for students with disabilities, Internet research by disabled students is not possible with inaccessible web page design" (Waddell, 1998).
Carnevale (1999) adds: "As colleges and universities expand their distance-education programs, they are finding that they must include the virtual equivalent of ramps when building their website. Higher education institutions know they're obligated. "It's not that web site creators are ignoring the accessibility issue,” says Jane Jarrows, president of Disability Access and Information. “It is that they don't always realize how important accessibility is." While the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) has specific guidelines for compliance on traditional campuses, the agency has not yet issued accessibility rules for online education.
United States Legal Cases Related to Education
According to Waddell:
Not surprisingly, web accessibility issues are now being faced by educational institutions. Library reference services are being transformed by the efficiency of Internet access to information systems and search engines. Professors are teaching long distance learning courses over the Internet and even if a student is physically in class, homework assignments and resources are being posted on class homepages. Yet, even if a library terminal has assistive computer technology installed for students with disabilities, Internet research by students with disabilities is not possible with inaccessible web page design.
A blind student from Long Beach California filed a complaint to the Office of Civil Rights. In a personal e-mail communication, April, 1999, an attachment of a letter sent from R. Scott, Team, Team Leader, Office of Civil Rights to President, Long Beach California stated:
Long Beach failed to provide a student with the accommodations required by her disability (blindness) to access the college of business curriculum and other educational programs. OCR has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this complaint and over the university under both Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities, which prohibit recipients of Department of Education funds and/or public institutions, respectively, from discriminating against persons with disabilities. The university provided OCR with a voluntary resolution plan, which resolved the issues raised in this case. The plan included the following commitments:
1.) Develop and implement a systematic method for ensuring that the issue of accessibility to persons with disabilities, particularly blind persons, is taken into account when colleges purchase computer software and hardware.
2.) Develop and implement a systematic method for informing campus employees who design/select web pages for use by students to make sure the web pages are in accordance with principles known to maximize accessibility to users with disabilities, including visual impairments
Waddell, 1998, provides more information about this case by citing Brummel’s 1994 white paper, “ The Information Infrastructure: Reaching Society’s Goals Report of the Information Infrastructure Task Force Committee on Applications and Technology Published by: U.S. Department of Commerce.”
“…(T)he issue is not whether the student with the disability is merely provided access, but the issue is rather the extent to which the communication is actually as effective as that provided to others. Title II (of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990) also strongly affirms the important role that computer technology is expected to play as an auxiliary aid by which communication is made effective for persons with disabilities” (Pages 1-2, 1996 Letter; 28 C.F.R. 35.160(a)) (Waddell, 1998 citing Brummel, 1994).
In further clarifying what is meant by “effective communication,” OCR has held that the three basic components of effective communication are “timeliness of delivery, accuracy of the translation and provision in a manner and medium appropriate to the significance of the message and the abilities of the individual with the disability” (Page 1, 1997 Letter) (Waddell, 1998, citing Brummel, 1994).
Of particular interest is the analogy OCR draws between the rationale for bringing an existing building up to code for access and the purchase of new technology for information systems. For example, buildings built prior to access laws are governed by "program access" requirements, and remodeling triggers the requirement to install certain accessible architectural features (Waddell, 1998, citing Brummel, 1994).
Similarly, the effective communication requirement imposes a duty to solve barriers to information access that the entity's purchasing choices create. Whenever existing technology is "upgraded" by a new technology feature, it is important to ensure that the new technology either improves accessibility or is compatible with existing assistive computer technology. For example, web authoring software programs that erect barriers in their coding of web pages fall under this scrutiny.
Last, OCR states that when an entity selects software programs and/or hardware equipment not adaptable for people with disabilities, "the subsequent substantial expense of providing access is not generally regarded as an undue burden when such cost could have been significantly reduced by considering the issue of accessibility at the time of the initial selection" (Page 2, 1997 Letter). Therefore, all technology improvements must take into account the removal of barriers and prevent new barriers to access. Covered entities preparing to retrofit their web sites need to be aware of this issue. (Waddell, 1998 citing Brummel, 1994)
On June 25, 2001, the accessibility requirements for U.S. electronic and information technology took effect under Section 508. This law mandates that this technology be accessible according to standards developed by the Access Board, which are now part of the federal government’s procurement regulations.
Section 508 and its enforcement provisions apply to products procured by U.S. federal agencies after June 25, 2001. This law relies heavily on the procurement process to make sure there is compliance with the new standards. Compliance with the standards is required unless it would pose an "undue burden"—as defined in the standards—or if no complying product is commercially available. The law permits individuals with disabilities to file a complaint with the appropriate federal agency concerning access to products procured after the effective date. In June, 2001, President George Bush visited the Pentagon's Computer/Electronic Accommodations Program Technology Evaluation Center (CAPTEC), which evaluates and demonstrates assistive technology for individuals with disabilities at the Department of Defense and other federal agencies. The President used this visit to call attention to new rules implementing Section 508 and to commit federal leadership in providing greater access for Americans with disabilities.
International Accessibility Policy and Legislation
Accessibility issues are considered to be one of the “target areas for equal participation” at an international level. Late in 1993—at the infancy of the World Wide Web—the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Standard Rules on the Equalisation of Opportunities of Persons with Disabilities [1]. Rule 5 of the Standard Rules addresses accessibility in terms of the physical environment and with reference to information and communications services. Among other points, Rule 5 recommends: "States … develop strategies to make information services and documentation accessible for different groups of persons with disabilities."
Although not a legally binding instrument, the Standard Rules represent a strong moral and political commitment of governments to take action to attain equalization of opportunities for persons with disabilities. The rules serve as an instrument for policy making and as a basis for technical and economic cooperation. In the past few years, a special rapporteur appointed by the U.N. Secretary General to monitor the implementation of the Standard Rules has encouraged governments to consider accessibility of information and communications services within their country’s social development policies.
The unique governance structure of the Internet makes it difficult, if not impossible, for a country to impose accessibility legislation on its own citizens. For example, it is not easy for one government to impose penalties for poor accessibility in a web site of one of its own citizens if the web site is hosted in another country. Governments have used either policy or limited legislation in an effort to ensure that public information is an accessible public good.
Policies that encourage accessibility—stating its benefits to the producers and consumers of information—are used by most of the early adopters of the importance of information accessibility. These policy/guidelines can only implement minor penalties such as the notoriety of non-conformance. Australia, Canada and Portugal have issued policy statements, and have mostly limited policy application to their own federal governments.
A good example of a clear and concise policy statement comes from the "Guide to the Internet" of the Government of Canada. It states:
"Since the end user cannot count on either standard technology or helping devices to ensure access to information on the [World Wide] Web, the onus is on the web page developer to deliver the message in a way that allows everyone to benefit."It is every Canadian's right to receive Government information or service in a form that can be used, and it is Government of Canada's obligation to provide it."
Only the U.S. has, so far, turned information accessibility into legislation. It does so using both “push” and “pull” regulations. "Push" regulations—such as Section 255 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996—require industry to consider accessibility. This type of regulation is, however, only effective in production of accessible products such as kneeling buses and accessible teller machines. It is difficult to regulate delivery of online information using “push” regulation because World Wide Web information is available globally, and there are many countries that do not consider information accessibility an issue.
Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act is an example of "pull" legislation because it requires that the government purchase accessible products, but does not require that industry produce them. This provides a market pull to industry. Obviously, industry prefers pull regulations to push regulations. In practice, Section 508 may also be more effective because suppliers stand to lose major federal contracts if they are perceived not to adopt corporate accessibility policies. By imposing accessibility regulation on its own ranks, the U.S. federal government is hoping that corporations will adopt accessibility policies as a matter of example and as a sign of good corporate citizenship.
The European Union seems convinced that “pull” regulation and standardizing on WAI is their best option. In its Europe Action Plan, the E.U. provides a special section titled “e-accessibility: Participation for all in the knowledge-based economy.” This action plan optimistically targets the year 2002 as the deadline for all member countries to make their federal websites follow the WAI Content Accessibility Guidelines.
In Canada, federal websites have mostly complied with the Treasury Board Secretariat's Common Look and Feel (CLF) Guidelines. The successful implementation probably makes Canada's web sites the most accessible among industrialized nations. But the Treasury Board is not satisfied. The CLF Guidelines are currently being used in the formulation of legislation similar to Section 508, and with a compliance date of December 31, 2002. The difference between U.S. regulations and the Canadian and E.U. regulations is that Canada and the E.U. are adopting the W3C Web Accessibility Initiative as a reference material to keep with new technologies and developments. This move will likely be the same approach as other countries determine how, if ever, they formulate information accessibility policy.
Unfortunately, many countries may never have to deal with web accessibility for mostly economic reasons. One reason is that country priorities for information and communication services will naturally begin with the telecommunications infrastructure and the cost/benefit analysis of various platforms. For example, the e-Mexico project concentrates on making telecommunications facilities available to the rural areas, and the term accessibility is used to refer to the access of these facilities.
Another reason web accessibility might not be adopted is that in countries where labor costs are low, care giving for persons with disabilities is the norm, and independent living is not common. Caregivers can be asked to provide other services such as reading books and online information.
Resources and Information
Available on this site is a free educator’s test program for online use. Suggestions for improvement are encouraged. Educators are encouraged to utilize the free test program for creating, delivering grading and reporting tests. Also available is a test profile function that allows test tuning and tweaking.
This United Nation’s source (Valdes, 2001) contains overviews of information related to the definition of accessibility and issues such as the need for accessibility, e-mail accessibility, adaptive technologies, etc.
Association for the Advancement of Assistive Technologies in Europe (AAATE) This group is the largest association on assistive technology outside the U.S.
Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)
AACE is an international educational and professional organization dedicated to the advancement of knowledge, theory, and quality of learning and educational skills at all levels with information technology. AACE is committed to making Universal Web Accessibility a special strand for major conferences in order to emphasize that accessibility is part of educational practice and not a separate entity. The next two conferences will be: 1.) ED-MEDIA 2002-World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications in Denver, CO, USA, June 24-29, 2002; and 2.) World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, in Montréal, Canada, Oct. 15-19, 2002. July 15 is the deadline for submission to the E-Learning Conference. If you wish to be considered for the accessibility thread committee, send your vita immediately to the Chair, Deanie French, at dfrench@swt.edu.
Center for It Accommodation CITA is a nationally recognized model for influencing accessible information environments, services and management practices. An example of a project is the Public Information Networks Need Accessible Collaborative Learning Environments. Content includes an overview of activities from the past year that show progress toward achieving a vision for a Knowledge Age technological infrastructure: an accessible collaborative learning environment.
Computer/Electronic/Accommodations Program (CAP) The Computer/Electronic Accommodations Program (CAP) provides assistive technology accommodations and services to people with disabilities at the Department of Defense (DOD), at no cost to individual activities. CAP's mission is to ensure people with disabilities have equal access to the information environment and opportunities in DOD.
Disabilities and Computing Program UCLA's Disabilities and Computing Program mission is to facilitate the integration of adaptive computing technology into the areas of instruction, study, research and employment at UCLA.
Disabilities, Opportunities, Internet working, and Technology (DO-IT) DO-IT at the University of Washington includes a listing of Internet resources for accessible web design, as well as other information. DO-IT undertakes activities to increase the participation of individuals with disabilities in academic programs and careers.
Disability Access Information and Support (DAIS) This resource for the higher education community provides a range of services for those concerned with disability and access in higher education. The site incorporates all of the components of ADA, which includes building in technology access. Jane Jarrow is President of DAIS and has established a reputation for being knowledgeable about the issues of importance related to disability in the higher education arena.
Electronic Curbcuts: Universal Access for Everyone
This source reviews international events impacting accessibility (Waddell, 1999). Three developments that were reviewed are of particular interest. First, the United Kingdom report entitled, “Boosting the UK Digital Economy-- a Virtual Think-Tank.” Second, in 1999, the country of Portugal enacted a national law mandating accessibility in the design of government websites. Third, the Attorney General for the country of Australia requested that the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission investigate access to electronic commerce and other new service delivery technologies by older Australians and people with disabilities.
Federal Communications Commission New Release (1999)
The FCC adopted rules and policies to implement Section 255 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and Section 251(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934. These rules gave people with disabilities access to a broad range of telecommunication products and services including telephones, cell phones, pagers, call-waiting, and operator services, which were generally unavailable for persons with disabilities in 1999. Keep up to date on FCC news through this government Web site.
Five steps to accessible Web sites
This site offers help with the monumental task of
creating accessible sites, by providing five basic guidelines (Dahm,
2001). In addition, there are several links to different free
testing services, such as Bobby. 
Government of Canada Internet Guide
This site provides assistance for universal accessibility
design to ensure that sites are developed to serve the largest possible audience
using the broadest range of hardware and software platforms, and that the needs
of users with disabilities are considered.
HTML Writers Guild (HWG) The Writers Guild
provides resources, support, representation and education for web authors at
all skill levels. The HTML Writers Guild also has an education component, Accessible
Web Authoring Resources and Education (AWARE). The AWARE goal is to serve as
a central resource for web authors for learning about web accessibility. Online
learning tools are valuable and yet reasonable. The Writers Guild also offers
classes to help practitioners develop skills in developing accessible web pages.
Membership in the Writers Guild is open to anyone with an interest in the skill
of web design. Full membership is only $49 (U.S.) per year, and a free trial
membership is available.
Many different types of courses are offered. See http://www.hwg.org/services/classes/ for current course schedules. Kynn Bartlett will conduct the next available Web accessibility course. This Accessible Web Design online class will start April 22, 2002, and is seven weeks long.
For full members the cost of each course is $50.00 and for trial members the cost is $100.00. Obviously, the better bargain is to join the HTML Writers Guild first. Another perk is that once you are a member of the Guild, you are permitted to place the Guild Icon on your Web site.
IMS. The IMS Global Learning Consortium, Inc., develops and promotes open specifications for facilitating online distributed learning activities such as locating and using educational content, tracking learner progress, reporting learner performance and exchanging student records between administrative systems. IMS has two major goals: a) to define the technical specifications for interoperability of applications and services in distributed learning; and b) to support the incorporation of the IMS specifications into products and services worldwide. IMS hopes that the specifications will provide guidelines for systems to “interoperate.” An international white paper, IMS Guidelines for Developing Accessible Learning Applications was supported by a grant from the Learning Anytime Anywhere Partnerships (LAAP), a program administered by the Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE), U.S. Department of Education
Making Your Web Pages More Accessible
This practical site from the University of York (United Kingdom) contains thirteen pages of guidelines to use in making web pages more accessible. Numerous problems are identified along with practical solutions.
http://www.york.ac.uk/coord/
docs/whb/access.htm#forms
Mr. Long Term Care Many adults age 50 years and older often retire and go back to school to seek a degree or fulfill a desired educational goal. Mr. Long Term Care, Martin Bayne, who has Parkinson's disease, stores a lengthy directory for seniors who are concerned about health issues: Alzheimer, depression, diabetes, heart disease, impaired mobility and other disabilities.
Lighthouse International Lighthouse International is a leading resource worldwide on vision impairment and vision rehabilitation.
National Center for Accessible Media NCAM is a research and development facility that works to make media accessible to disabled persons, minority-language users and people with low literacy skills. This site also maintains separate types of disabilities. NCAM promotes the use of a Web Access symbol and provides model examples of accessible pages. Creators of web- and CD-based multimedia projects need an authoring tool to make their materials accessible to persons with disabilities. NCAM meets this need by providing MAGpie, the ideal authoring environment for multimedia providers who want to add captions, subtitles and audio descriptions to their work. The Trace Research and Development Center provide funding for MAGpie.
Trace Research & Development Center The Trace Center is a part of University of Wisconsin-Madison’s College of Engineering. The Trace Center is currently working on ways to make standard information technologies and telecommunications systems more accessible and usable by people with disabilities. Trace Center provides resources for design of accessible web pages including applet and plug-in features.
Universal Design of Consumer Products: Current Industry Practice and Perceptions
This paper provides a historical definition of “Universal Design” and briefly describes research findings (Vanderheiden, G. & Tobias, 2000). Businesses as well as others will find this site helpful in determining why and how some companies successfully practice universal design.
U.S. Access Board The Access Board is an independent federal agency devoted to accessibility for people with disabilities. It operates with about 30 staff members and a governing board of representatives from federal departments and public members appointed by the President. The Access Board consists of 25 members. The President appoints 13 members from among the public, and a majority of the members is required to be individuals with disabilities. The other 12 members are heads of the following federal agencies or their designees whose positions are Executive Level IV or above: The Departments of Health and Human Services, Education, Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, Labor, Interior, Defense, Justice, Veterans Affairs, and Commerce; the General Services Administration; and the United States Postal Service. Key responsibilities of the Board include: a) developing and maintaining accessibility requirements for the physical environment, transit vehicles, telecommunications equipment, and electronic and information technology, and b) providing technical assistance and training on these guidelines and standards.
U.S. Department of Justice Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Home Page This legal resource provides links to mandates, laws and amendments concerning Americans with Disabilities Act.
Web Accessibility in Mind WebAIM’s goal is to improve accessibility to online learning opportunities for all people, in particular, to improve accessibility for individuals with disabilities who currently may have a difficult time getting access to post-secondary online learning opportunities.
WorldEnable is an Internet accessibility initiative in support of the international goals of equalizing opportunities for, by and with persons with disabilities.
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) was created in October 1994 and has lead the World Wide Web to its full potential by developing common protocols to promote its evolution and ensure interoperability. W3C has more than 400 member organizations from around the world and has earned international recognition for its contributions to the growth of the Web.
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) provides guidelines and resources for establishing accessibility of the Web through five primary areas of work: technology, guidelines, tools, education and outreach, and research & development.
Verification of Web Site as Universally Accessible and Related Services
Web pages need to be validated to ensure they meet the minimum requirements for universal accessibility. There are two major validation services—available free online—which evaluate web pages and help identify potential accessibility problems to correct. The first is Bobby, which is part of the Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST), a non-profit organization, whose mission is to expand opportunities for individuals with disabilities through the development of innovative technology. The Bobby validation system is simple to use to validate a web site. The web site URL is submitted by entering the information onto the web page and then clicking a submit button.
The process for obtaining the report is easy. Copy and paste the URL to insert into the verification program. Copying and pasting keeps from making a typing error. Tip: If a Windows-based computer is used, select/highlight the URL and use "Ctrl” and “C" keys to copy the URL and then "Ctrl” and “V" keys to paste the URL to the address box.
Web sites should have at least a Priority One Accessible rating. When users get feedback from the site, they will be able to see the entire page. Tiny question marks by the images means for users to check their information manually—this will not stop those from getting validated. If major problems are experienced, a question mark appears by each image.
Differences in the report will be demonstrated using
the Southwest Texas State University healthcare human resource student information
site: http://www.swt.edu/healthservicesresearch/
student.htm.
Example
This site was Bobby approved according to section 508 guidelines. However, it was not approved at the higher-level W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. This level of approval is higher than the U.S. federal statutes. Most educational programs do not need to meet these standards. W3C is helpful to web programmers and is challenging for non-programmers to obtain validation from this service.
If the Section 508
issues listed below do not apply to the page, then it qualifies as Bobby
Section 508 Approved, and that page is entitled to bear the Bobby Section
508 Approved icon. To obtain the icon and learn how to place it in a page,
visit the Icon Guidelines
page on the CAST web site. The report for the example is provided below with
the author responses to indicate that the computer generated concerns did not
apply.
Section 508 User Checks
User checks are triggered by something specific on the page. However, the web page author must determine whether they apply. Bobby Section 508 Approval requires that none of them apply to the page. Please review these five items:
1. If style sheets are ignored or unsupported, are pages still readable and usable?
Response: The page is readable and usable by both Netscape and Explorer
If color is used to
convey information, make sure the information is also represented another way.
(three instances)
Lines 110, 114, 226
Response: Color is not used to convey information.
2.
If this is a data
table (not used for layout only), identify headers for the table rows and columns.
(two instances)
Lines 26, 123
Response: Table is for layout purposes.
3. Consider specifying a logical tab order among form controls, links and objects.
Response: No form controls are used.
4.
If an image conveys
important information beyond what is in its alternative text, provide an extended
description. (two instances)
Lines 110, 226
Response: Extended description not needed.
The following two items are not triggered by any specific feature on the page, but are still important for accessibility and are required for Bobby Section 508 Approved status.
6. If you can't make a page accessible, construct an alternate accessible version.
7. If a timed process is about to expire, give the user notification and a chance to extend the timeout.
Response: Neither item 6 nor 7 apply to this page.
W3C Validation. The second major validation site is W3C’s HTML validation service, a free service that checks documents like HTML and XHTML for conformance to W3C recommendations and other standards.
Approval Icon. The NCAM accessibility icon was selected
from 17 symbols as a Web Access Symbol for people with disabilities. Web masters
can use this to denote their site contains accessibility features for disabled
users. The symbol should always be accompanied by its description—a globe, marked
with a grid, tilts at an angle; a keyhole is cut into its surface—and alt-text
tag, . This image was
created by Stromship Studios of Boston.
There is no charge to use this symbol, and it may be used in electronic or printed form. It can be copied from the NCAM web site and pasted it into a document. http://ncam.wgbh.org/accessncam.html
Related services:
Lynx
Viewer: This link converts web pages into a text-only format. Text only
pages easily meet 508 standards. It is not recommended to have a text page and
more dynamic page, as keeping both pages current is a daunting task.
Media Access Generator
(MAGpie): Allows authors to add captions to three multimedia formats: QuickTime,
SMIL, and SAMI. From the National Center for Accessible Media.
Conclusions
"The difficulties of studying the Internet can only be described in the present moment due to the constant state of change on the Internet" (Rizia, 1999). The future will hold many exciting technological innovations, making computers adapt to individuals rather than the reverse. Technology that allows access to computer resources for a person with disabilities is known as adaptive technology. These "electronic curb-cuts" are a combination of hardware and software. The challenge is making adaptive technology part of any base configuration and making all components work in a seamless fashion. This will increase the access to computers and applications without making major modifications.
When designing for the Internet, a global approach needs to be considered. As of now, the U.S. is the only country that mandates accessibility for anyone doing business with the government. Of course, that includes most higher education institutions. Meeting accessibility guidelines for most situations means adding descriptive tags to any image and text links for audio or video files. Anyone, anywhere can use the Bobby site to check for these simple things. Having accessibility sites makes good economic sense as the number of individuals with disabilities on the Net—who could emerge as consumers of vast numbers of products—continues to increase.
... In postsecondary education, we can no longer afford to participate in ad-hoc systems that create individual accommodations for fair and reasonable access. A priori system must be created to optimize the participation of all students... The community of postsecondary education is resourceful group of individuals. It is imperative that we create coordinated systems that enable full access for students... It is important to note systems change is a slow and, at times, painful process. However, the work must be done. The sooner we create and implement sustainable solutions, the sooner ALL students can participate in their right to experience the power of the Internet for lifelong learning.
References
K. Barlett (personal communication, June 14, 1999).
M. Bayne (personal communication, June 10, 1999).
Carnevale, D. (1999, October 29). Colleges strive to give disabled students access to online courses. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved March 7, 2002: Http://chronicle.com/free/v46/i10/10a06901.htm
Dahm, T. (2001). Five steps to accessible web sites. Retrieved from
the World Wide Web March 7, 2002: http://techupdate.zdnet.com/techupdate
/stories/main/0,14179,2781418,00.html
McDunn, R. (2002) Web content accessibility tips and tricks. Retrieved from the World Wide Web March 7, 2002: http://www-group.slac.stanford.edu/wim/accessibility/default.htm
F. Rizia (personal communication, June 10, 1999).
Valdes, L. (2000). Accessibility on the Internet. Retrieved from the World Wide Web March 7, 2002: http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/disacc00.htm
Vanderheiden, G., & Tobias, J. (2000).
Universal design of consumer products: Current industry
practice and perceptions. Retrieved from the
World Wide Web March 7, 2002: http://trace.wisc.edu/docs/
ud_consumer_products_hfes2000/
Waddell, C., & Thomason, K. (1998). Is your
site ADA-compliant…or a lawsuit-in-waiting? Retrieved from the World
Wide Web March 7, 2002: http://www.icdri.org/
is_%20yoursite_ada_compliant.htm
Waddell, C. (1998). Applying the ADA to the Internet: A web accessibility standard. Retrieved from the World Wide Web March 7, 2002: http://consumerlawpage.com/article/ada.shtml
Waddell, C. (1999). Electronic curbcuts: Universal access for everyone.
Retrieved from the World Wide Web March 7, 2002: http://www.cisp.org/imp/
december_99/12_99waddell.htm
