Successfully reported this slideshow.

More Related Content

Adaptive web accessibility metrics

  1. 1. Adaptive Web Accessibility Metrics Markel Vigo1 and Giorgio Brajnik2 1 Laboratory of Human Mobility 2 University of Udine and Technology BCS HCI Workshop: The socio‐technological issues of adaptive interfaces and user profiling for accessibility September 6, Dundee (Scotland)
  2. 2. 1. Motivation for Adaptive Accessibility Metrics • We’d like to know the answer to this question: “To what extent is accessible a web page… - for a determined user with their own abilities - using a determined Assistive Technology and user agent - operating a specific device - and carrying out a determined task” • …equals to measuring accessibility in use or contextual accessibility • There are some scenarios that could benefit - As a way to measure interface adaptations - Adaptive hypermedia techniques - Accessibility observatories and QA • Traditional web accessibility metrics aim at measuring accessibility wrt to conformance Adaptive Web Accessibility Metrics Vigo &Brajnik, 2010
  3. 3. 1. Motivation for Adaptive Accessibility Metrics • Why adaptive accessibility scores? - Do conformance scores capture the accessibility perceived by users? - Traditional metrics are based on general purpose guidelines - Assuming metrics are adequate and valid many error-rates are introduced - Trusting in guidelines is risky - Guidelines do not capture all users’ needs and interaction context • We need accessibility scores that capture the interaction context • Metrics are tied to evaluation process • Adaptive evaluation would produce user-tailored scores • Better if scores are automatically obtained Adaptive Web Accessibility Metrics Vigo &Brajnik, 2010
  4. 4. 2. Challenges and Engineering solutions Challenge 1: how to capture interaction context data (non intrusively) • Select only those guidelines that impact on a determined user group • Not enough • Context is key for adaptive evaluations •Detecting installed Assistive Technology and user agents is a step forward • Evaluation tools need a user profile as an input Adaptive Web Accessibility Metrics Vigo &Brajnik, 2010
  5. 5. 2. Challenges and Engineering solutions Challenge 2: quantify severity of violated accessibility barriers • Weight barriers for a specific user context • Application scenarios require real-time scores • How to quantify barriers automatically? • Make use of infrastructures such as Accessibility Commons • Accessibility metadata stored beforehand • Triples: <accessibility problem, context, severity> Adaptive Web Accessibility Metrics Vigo &Brajnik, 2010
  6. 6. 2. Challenges and Engineering solutions Challenge 3: reasoning over guidelines • Not to tie the metric to a determined guideline set • No matter which guideline set is used the metric should adapt to it • Guidelines have to be specified in a common language so that evaluation tools can understand them interoperability • Metrics require parameters such as number of applied guidelines, severities, etc inference • Interoperability + inference = ontologies? Adaptive Web Accessibility Metrics Vigo &Brajnik, 2010
  7. 7. Adaptive Web Accessibility Metrics Markel Vigo1 and Giorgio Brajnik2 1 Laboratory of Human Mobility 2 University of Udine and Technology BCS HCI Workshop: The socio‐technological issues of adaptive interfaces and user profiling for accessibility September 6, Dundee (Scotland)

Editor's Notes

  • Accessibility in use: the property of a site to support the same level of effectiveness for people with disabilities as it does for non-disabled peopleUser context and would consist of the user profileCheck the effectiveness of interface adaptationsprecisely in numeric/qualitative terms. It is useful to meet laws that enforce inclusive design
  • BUT why we need adaptive metrics?There is a plethora of research stating that guidelines conformance does not necessarily ensure accessibilitySome scenarios require real time scoresBefore we obtain user-tailored scores there are some challenges that should be faced by both adaptive evaluation/measurement
  • To do so we need to address the following challenges Intuitive solution and initial approachwe need a dynamic selection of guidelines that do applyencapsulating in a CC/PP profile
  • Some proposed methods can weight violations applying human intervention
  • As a conclusion,Do we need an adaptive evaluation method and then apply common metrics?or we need traditional methods and apply adaptive accessibility metrics?Do we need both?What do you think?
  • ×