Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Keith w4 a 2012
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Keith w4 a 2012

864
views

Published on

Published in: Design, Technology

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
864
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • Riga Agreement (2006) to make public websites accessible by 2010 and call to private sector
  • Transcript

    • 1. W4A 2012 Certification or conformance: making a successful commitment to WCAG 2.00 Suzette Keith, Nikolaos Floratos, Gill Whitney1 W4A, Lyons France 16-17 April 2012
    • 2. Low levels of conformance to accessibilityguidelines European benchmarking studies show very low levels of conformance to accessibility guidelines: “3% passed the full range of level A automated and manual checkpoints in 2008” (MeAC 2008) 2 W4A, Lyons France 16-17 April 2012
    • 3. Meeting accessibility guidelines WCAG 1 (1999) and 2.0 (2008)  Are internationally agreed and recognised  Are embedded into national laws, frameworks and best practice guides  Can be used to support procurement  Are referenced in national certification schemes 3 W4A, Lyons France 16-17 April 2012
    • 4. How do you know if a website is accessible? Web accessibility certification  Most offer a directory of successful websites  All provide a certification logo  Different schemes apply different test protocols in different national contexts Voluntary declaration of conformance  WCAG 2.0 includes guidance on claiming conformance  The webpage can display a logo and link back to WCAG 2.0 conformance  Statement of web accessibility policy and action taken  No system of monitoring 4 W4A, Lyons France 16-17 April 2012
    • 5. Does voluntary conformance meet user needs? ANEC – ‘the consumer voice in standardisation in Europe’ Question: Is there a need for greater quality control?  What is the impact of certification or voluntary declaration of conformance to web accessibility guidelines?  Given the low level of conformance by websites making a declaration of accessibility, how can we better understand the causes and indicators of progress? 5 W4A, Lyons France 16-17 April 2012
    • 6. Finding websites claiming accessibility Selected countries  Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Spain and UK Sources  Major websites previously identified in MeAC  Directories of certification bodies  Directory of standards compliant web developers  Backlinking search to WCAG compliance logos 6 W4A, Lyons France 16-17 April 2012
    • 7. Inspecting conformance Selection criteria  100 websites: half were certificated and half made a voluntary declaration  5 EU countries having certification schemes  Most (76) from Government and Public body  Some (24) from Commercial sector Automatic testing (SortSite)  Over 100 test points to WCAG 2.0  25 pages  Minimal expert intervention Manual testing by expert evaluator  Only those with 10 or less failed test points  Five pages inspected 7 W4A, Lyons France 16-17 April 2012
    • 8. Automatic test results Table 1. Results of automatic tests of government and public body websites Automatic test points Self Total % passed/failed Certified declaration n=74 Pass WCAG 2.0 A 0 3 4% Fail 10 or less test points 12 8 27% Fail 11-20 test points 15 12 36% Fail 21 or more test points 10 14 32%8 W4A, Lyons France 16-17 April 2012
    • 9. ‹#› W4A, Lyons France 16-17 April 2012
    • 10. Analysis of success criteria Table 2 Top 5 failed WCAG 2.0 level A criteria Number of certified Number of self WCAG 2.0 level A criteria websites failing this declared websites criteria failing this criteria Text equivalence: 1.1.1 6 7 Information and relationship: 1.3.1 4 5 Link purpose: 2.4.4 3 6 Labels: 3.3.2 4 5 Name, role, value: 4.1.2 3 510 W4A, Lyons France 16-17 April 2012
    • 11. Discussion Certification to national standards  Lack of consistent results between certification bodies and WCAG 2.0 Voluntary conformance declaration  Indications of commitment but no monitoring process Specific success criteria  Multiple failures of level A , but all offered breadcrumb trail, AAA criteria Website complexity  Evidence of best practice in complex government information websites 11 W4A, Lyons France 16-17 April 2012
    • 12. Conclusions Need to establish trust in accessibility declarations whether voluntary or certificated – passing at WGAG 2.0 level A should be routine! Further evidence needed to identify persistent accessibility issues could be collected by certification bodies and researchers in order to support improvements to tools and training Need learn from the commitment of developers who deliver best practice solutions at level A and higher 12 W4A, Lyons France 16-17 April 2012
    • 13. W4A 2012 Thank-you Contact lead author: suzette.skeith@gmail.com  This research project was funded by ANEC with Nikolaos Floratos as project manager  Expert inspection was carried out by Andrea Kennedy ++ for Shaw Trust  Additional expert support from Cam Nicholl and Gavin Evans, previously from Shaw Trust and now with Digital Accessibility Centre  Automatic test tool support from Mark Douglas, SortSite  Research programme and activity carried out by Suzette Keith and Gill Whitney, Middlesex University 13 W4A, Lyons France 16-17 April 2012

    ×