http://www.csun.edu/cod/conference/2014/sessions/index.php/public/presentations/view/655 Abstract Fixing accessibility problems requires collaboration from many teams across an organization. Recommendations on who to involve, how to plan and how to quantify that effort. Extended Abstract One of the biggest challenges for those working to fix web content accessibility issues in a large organization is determining who needs to be involved in the process and receiving informed and timely decisions from these stakeholders. IBM Interactive consultants Aidan Tierney and Richard Chen will share insights gained from their experience advising enterprises that have addressed accessibility on a large scale. In this session they will explain factors to consider when beginning a remediation project and recommend practices to prioritize and optimize the work. The effort to fix accessibility problems often begins with an application team. As that team reviews issues in the content (perhaps after receiving the results of an assessment) they may expect to be able to resolve these issues on their own. Often they will discover that other stakeholders need to become involved. This session will explore questions the application team may need to consider. Many of these will require input from other teams. The earlier in the process these questions can be addressed will increase the efficiency of the remediation project. • Which development teams may need to make changes? • Who from the business needs to sign off on changes to the interface? • Who will make and approve design changes? • Does the legal department (or marketing) need to approve changes? • How to communicate issues that external vendors may be responsible for fixing? • How to communicate to business leadership about this effort and how will they react? • Who will test whether accessibility issues from the initial assessment have been fixed? • What user agents will be used for testing? • Do testers and developers have the tools and user agents? How can they acquire them? • Do the testers and developers need training in accessibility tools and techniques? • How will different interpretations of WCAG be resolved? • How to handle exceptions - issues that cannot be fixed? • How much accessibility is enough to meet conformance?

1. Optimizing the Accessibility Remediation
Process in Large Organizations
Aidan Tierney, atierney@ca.ibm.com
Richard Chen, chenr@us.ibm.com
March 20, 2014
IBM Interactive Experience
© 2014 IBM Corporation

2. Accessibility remediation in a large organization
WHAT are the accessibility problems and the potential solutions?

3. Accessibility remediation in a large organization
WHAT are the accessibility problems and the potential solutions?
WHO will contribute to solution in a large organization?
HOW to address some of the issues

4. Aidan Tierney
Senior Accessibility Consultant,
IBM Interactive Experience
IBM Interactive Experience
Richard Chen
User Research and Design Senior
Consultant, IBM Interactive Experience
Who’s here?

5. Who’s here?
WHO are you? What’s your name?
WHAT do you do related to accessibility? What
role(s) do you perform?
Developer Designer
Tester Project manager
Policy / compliance Legal
Accessibility Consultant Marketing
WHERE do you do this?
Your organization: federal govt., education,
startup, large company.

6. Accessibility Program Manager
In a department of one
Experienced in accessibility,
development and design
Recent hire
Let’s meet Julia

7. Julia works at Colossal Corporation

8. Online Account Application
is not Accessible
Customer complaints
Senior management decided
application must conform to
WCAG Level A and AA

9. Julia does accessibility assessment
Syntax checking tool
Manual checks – e.g. Color contrast
Assistive technology – Screen reader
Assess

10. WHAT are the accessibility problems?
WHAT are the potential solutions?

11. Issue: Incorrect ALT text
<img alt="logo-file-C62" src="logo.png" />

12. Issue: Insufficient color contrast

13. Issue: Image of text

14. Issue: No indication for required fields

15. Assess
Propose
Solutions
Julia identifies
potential solutions

16. <alt%!>
Solution: ALT text
<img alt="Colossal Corporation"
src="logo.png" />

17. Cc
Solution: Color contrast
New: #707070
Old: #a0a0a0
Observed: Code comes from SocialMedia iframe

18. Solution: Image of text
Use HTML text and CSS, with system or web font
font-family: comic sans ms;
Insufficient contrast in original, new color needed

19. Solution: Required fields
Required fields are marked with an asterisk (*)
<input aria-required="true" type="text" />
Visual and programmatic indicator

20. Assess
Propose
Solutions
Remediate

21. If this was a form on her own personal website,
Julia could make these fixes in an afternoon

22. But it’s not so simple at Colossal Corporation

23. WHO complicates WHAT

24. Julia needs to find out WHO can…
Nilesh tells Julia his team
cannot make these changes

25. WHO will contribute to solutions in a
large organization?

26. Application development team
Code library/core components
Content management (CMS)
Application development team
Code library/core components
Content management (CMS)
Who will make DEVELOPMENT changes?

27. Who manages relationships with
3RD PARTY code providers

28. Who from the BUSINESS will approve
interface or functionality changes?

29. Who will decide,
approve and make
DESIGN changes?

30. Does LEGAL need to sign off?

31. Does BRANDING need
to be in the loop?

32. Does the MARKETING team
need to provide content?

33. Who will TEST?

34. And who from the
LEADERSHIP team
needs to be informed?

35. Accessibility project #1
More questions…

36. Who will decide which
TOOLS to use for testing?

37. Who will decide which BROWSERS, DEVICES
or USER AGENTS to support for accessibility?

38. Who will TRAIN testers and developers
in accessibility tools and techniques?

39. Who will resolve different interpretations of WCAG?

40. Who will authorize EXCEPTIONS?
Issues that cannot or will not be fixed?

41. Who will make DEVELOPMENT changes?
Who manages relationships with 3RD PARTY CODE?
Who from the BUSINESS will approve interface or functionality changes?
Who will decide, approve and make DESIGN changes?
Does LEGAL need to sign off?
Does the MARKETING team need to provide content?
Does BRANDING need to be in the loop?
Who from the business LEADERSHIP team needs to be informed?
Who will TEST?
Who will decide which TOOLS to use for testing?
Who will decide which BROWSERS, DEVICES or USER AGENTS to support for
accessibility?
Who will TRAIN testers and developers in accessibility tools and techniques?
Who will resolve different INTERPRETATIONS OF WCAG?
Who will authorize EXCEPTIONS?

43. And remember:
If this was her own website,
Julia could make these
fixes in an afternoon!

44. Does this sound familiar to anyone?
Have you run into these issues?
Got any more to add?

45. Believe it or not: real world examples

46. <alt%!>
Effort: ALT text
4 months duration (one image)
100+ person hours
Meetings & discussions involving 30+ resources

47. Cc
Effort: Color contrast
5 months duration
100+ person hours
Meetings & discussions involving 30+ resources

48. Effort: Image of text
6 months duration
100+ person hours
Meetings & discussions involving 20+ resources
Not implemented

49. Effort: Required fields
4 months duration
200+ person hours
Meetings & discussions involving 40+ resources
Alternate solution used - legal objected to asterisk

50. HOW to manage the issues

51. Originates
with
Approved
by
Implemented
by
Consider the solution workflow
Best to do consider this as early as possible

52. Originates with
• Design
guidelines
Approved
by
• Legal
• Business
Implemented
by
• Code library
• Application
development
Example workflow: required field solution
Can do this for any of the proposed fixes

53. Teams and stakeholders
Designers
Design Guidelines
Legal
Marketing
Branding
Code library
CMS
Application dev.
Business approvals
Testing
Senior leadership
3rd party code
Exception process
Tools
Training
Budgets

54. Factors of complexity
List roadblocks to remediation
Brainstorm!
Based on previous experiences

55. Circles of influence

56. Outside
Leadership
Legal
Branding
Influence
Vendors
Testing
Tools
Training
Other development
teams
Design guidelines
Control
Development
Design
WCAG interpretation
and fix
User Agent and devices

57. Factors to think aboutFactors to think about
Communication
Understanding of accessibility
Decision making
Budget
Technology versions

58. A method to
bring order... Weighting
Assign weights to each factor
Percentages summing to 100%
Issues by complexity

59. Factor Weight
Vendors 5%
Testing 20%
Tools 10%
Training 5%
Other Dev’s 2%
Design guides 3%
Factor Weight
Development 10%
Design 15%
WCAG 2%
User Agent 3%
Factor Weight
Leadership 5%
Legal 15%
Branding 5%

60. Introspection
Use weights to identify opportunities to
improve efficiency
Minimize barriers to design,
development, and remediation

61. Values
Assign values, e.g. 1 (low) to 3 (high)
Two values to plot – X = severity
Y = complexity
Weights can fluctuate

62. Applying weighting
to Colossal Corp.

63. Required Fields
Factor Weight Value Weighted
Development 10% 2 0.2
Design 15% 1 0.15
WCAG 2% 2 0.04
User Agent 3% 1 0.03
Vendors 5% 0 0
Testing 20% 3 0.6
Tools 10% 0 0
Training 5% 1 0.05
Other Dev’s 2% 1 0.02
Design guides 3% 3 0.09
Leadership 5% 1 0.05
Legal 15% 3 0.45
Branding 5% 0 0
Total 100% 1.68

64. Many pages affected
Aria-required vs. asterisk
In-house update, no impact
Harder with aria-required
High quantity
High impact design changes
Wording for directions
Asterisk used as another symbol
Required Fields
Factor Weight Value Weighted
Development 10% 2 0.2
Design 15% 1 0.15
WCAG 2% 2 0.04
User Agent 3% 1 0.03
Vendors 5% 0 0
Testing 20% 3 0.6
Tools 10% 0 0
Training 5% 1 0.05
Other Dev’s 2% 1 0.02
Design guides 3% 3 0.09
Leadership 5% 1 0.05
Legal 15% 3 0.45
Branding 5% 0 0
Total 100% 1.68

65. Contrast
Development 10% 1 0.1
Design 15% 2 0.3
WCAG 2% 3 0.06
User Agent 3% 1 0
Vendors 5% 3 0.15
Testing 20% 3 0.6
Tools 10% 1 0.1
Training 5% 3 0.15
Other Dev’s 2% 1 0.02
Design guides 3% 3 0.09
Leadership 5% 1 0.05
Legal 15% 0 0
Branding 5% 2 0.1
Total 1.72
Alt Text from vendor
Development 10% 1 0.1
Design 15% 0 0
WCAG 2% 1 0.02
User Agent 3% 1 0.03
Vendors 5% 3 0.15
Testing 20% 1 0.2
Tools 10% 1 0.1
Training 5% 2 0.1
Other Dev’s 2% 1 0.02
Design guides 3% 0 0
Leadership 5% 0 0
Legal 15% 2 0.3
Branding 5% 1 0.05
Total 1.07
Image of Text
Development 10% 3 0.3
Design 15% 2 0.3
WCAG 2% 1 0.02
User Agent 3% 1 0.03
Vendors 5% 2 0.1
Testing 20% 2 0.4
Tools 10% 1 0.1
Training 5% 3 0.15
Other Dev’s 2% 2 0.04
Design guides 3% 3 0.09
Leadership 5% 2 0.1
Legal 15% 3 0.45
Branding 5% 2 0.1
Total 2.18

66. Contrast Weighted Values in detail
Image of Test
Development 10% 3 0.3
Design 15% 2 0.3
WCAG 2% 1 0.02
User Agent 3% 1 0.03
Vendors 5% 2 0.1
Testing 20% 2 0.4
Tools 10% 1 0.1
Training 5% 3 0.15
Other Dev’s 2% 2 0.04
Design guides 3% 3 0.09
Leadership 5% 2 0.1
Legal 15% 3 0.45
Branding 5% 2 0.1
Total 2.18
Alt Text from vendor
Development 10% 1 0.1
Design 15% 0 0
WCAG 2% 1 0.02
User Agent 3% 1 0.03
Vendors 5% 3 0.15
Testing 20% 1 0.2
Tools 10% 1 0.1
Training 5% 2 0.1
Other Dev’s 2% 1 0.02
Design guides 3% 0 0
Leadership 5% 0 0
Legal 15% 2 0.3
Branding 5% 1 0.05
Total 1.07
Colors could be off-brand
Defined ratio, but many affects many
areas with different interpretation
Logos, images branding, and text from vendors
Negotiation, communication, updates
Affects many design elements
Easy fix to CSS files
Contrast
Development 10% 1 0.1
Design 15% 2 0.3
WCAG 2% 3 0.06
User Agent 3% 1 0
Vendors 5% 3 0.15
Testing 20% 3 0.6
Tools 10% 1 0.1
Training 5% 3 0.15
Other Dev’s 2% 1 0.02
Design guides 3% 3 0.09
Leadership 5% 1 0.05
Legal 15% 0 0
Branding 5% 2 0.1
Total 1.72

67. Image of Test
Development 10% 3 0.3
Design 15% 2 0.3
WCAG 2% 1 0.02
User Agent 3% 1 0.03
Vendors 5% 2 0.1
Testing 20% 2 0.4
Tools 10% 1 0.1
Training 5% 3 0.15
Other Dev’s 2% 2 0.04
Design guides 3% 3 0.09
Leadership 5% 2 0.1
Legal 15% 3 0.45
Branding 5% 2 0.1
Total 2.18
Contrast
Development 10% 1 0.1
Design 15% 2 0.3
WCAG 2% 3 0.06
User Agent 3% 1 0
Vendors 5% 3 0.15
Testing 20% 3 0.6
Tools 10% 1 0.1
Training 5% 3 0.15
Other Dev’s 2% 1 0.02
Design guides 3% 3 0.09
Leadership 5% 1 0.05
Legal 15% 0 0
Branding 5% 2 0.1
Total 1.72
Requires legal’s
approval
Training on
meaningful alt text
No design restraints
need to sync code,
should be easy
Alt Text from vendor
Development 10% 1 0.1
Design 15% 0 0
WCAG 2% 1 0.02
User Agent 3% 1 0.03
Vendors 5% 2 0.1
Testing 20% 1 0.2
Tools 10% 1 0.1
Training 5% 2 0.1
Other Dev’s 2% 1 0.02
Design guides 3% 0 0
Leadership 5% 0 0
Legal 15% 2 0.3
Branding 5% 1 0.05
Total 1

68. Alt Text from vendor
Development 10% 1 0.1
Design 15% 0 0
WCAG 2% 1 0.02
User Agent 3% 1 0.03
Vendors 5% 3 0.15
Testing 20% 1 0.2
Tools 10% 1 0.1
Training 5% 2 0.1
Other Dev’s 2% 1 0.02
Design guides 3% 0 0
Leadership 5% 0 0
Legal 15% 2 0.3
Branding 5% 1 0.05
Total 1.07
Contrast
Development 10% 1 0.1
Design 15% 2 0.3
WCAG 2% 3 0.06
User Agent 3% 1 0
Vendors 5% 3 0.15
Testing 20% 3 0.6
Tools 10% 1 0.1
Training 5% 3 0.15
Other Dev’s 2% 1 0.02
Design guides 3% 3 0.09
Leadership 5% 1 0.05
Legal 15% 0 0
Branding 5% 2 0.1
Total 1.72
Possibly complicated interpretation
Discuss with and update other teams
Identify images to test and procedure
Regression testing
Clear for Level AA
Design decisions on live fonts
and interaction
Create live fonts
Possible impact on responsive
Image of Text
Development 10% 3 0.3
Design 15% 2 0.3
WCAG 2% 1 0.02
User Agent 3% 1 0.03
Vendors 5% 2 0.1
Testing 20% 2 0.4
Tools 10% 1 0.1
Training 5% 3 0.15
Other Dev’s 2% 2 0.04
Design guides 3% 3 0.09
Leadership 5% 2 0.1
Legal 15% 3 0.45
Branding 5% 2 0.1
Total 2.18

69. More complexLess Complex
More severe
Less severe
Image of text (2.4, 3)
Contrast (1.72, 2.5)
Asterisk (1.68, 2.2)
Vendor Alt text (1, 1)
Prioritizing Issues

70. More accurate estimation  More objective choices
More accurate project plan and timeline
Julia’s at ease

71. What’s Next? …. Remediation
How much is enough?
Techniques: WCAG Level A vs. AA, 80-20, Agile, Cost
impact, Traffic

72. Julia’s a Hero!

73. WHAT? WHO? HOW?
In conclusion …

74. HOW?WHO?WHAT?
In conclusion …

75. HOW?WHO?WHAT?
In conclusion …

76. HOW?WHO?WHAT?
In conclusion …

77. Questions and Discussion

78. Aidan Tierney
atierney@ca.ibm.com
IBM Interactive Experience
Richard Chen
chenr@us.ibm.com
Contact us!
www.ibm.com/able

79. Thank you!

80. Time Topic – IBM Papers/Presentations/Panels Speaker/s
Wednesday March 19th
9:20-10:20 Practical Mobile Accessibility in the Enterprise Tom Babinszki
10:40-11:40 Costing Accessibility Remediation for Acquisitions Becky Gibson
1:50-2:50 Implementing Accessibility in a Graphing Utility Fred Esch
Thursday March 20th
9:20-10:20
Implementing Accessibility in an Enterprise
Mobile Web User Interface Toolkit
Tom Babinszki
10:40-11:40
Toward a Common Enterprise Accessibility
Operational Model
Bill Curtis-Davidson
1:50-2:50
Optimizing the Accessibility Remediation Process
in Large Organizations
Richard Chen,
Aidan Tierney
3:10-4:10
Media Captioner, Translator and Editor – A
Complete Collaborative Approach
Kaoru Shinkawa
Friday March 21st
9:20-10:20
Progress Report on the Global Public Inclusive
Infrastructure (GPII)
Denis Anson, Rich
Schwerdtfeger, Jim
Tobias, Gregg
Vanderheiden
10:40-11:40 Accessible Design Thinking
Mary Jo Mueller,
Matt King
1:50-2:50 W3C Cognitive Accessibility Task Force Panel
Judy Brewer, Rich
Schwerdtfeger, Susann
Keohane, Lisa Seeman,
Clayton Lewis, Suzanne
Taylor
IBM at CSUN 2014 – you’re invited
Join IBM in Harbor Ballroom A to learn
about the latest in accessible user
interface design, mobile accessibility,
accessibility risk and compliance
management, and much more.
© 2014 IBM Corporation

81. Image attributions
creativecommons.org/
Chris Blakeley: A portrait of the artist as a Cube
Phil Whitehouse: New Office
Dell #Inspire House
Dell. Elevating women and girls
Gokyo Ri: Western side of Mount Everest
Herval: Cubicle Life
Jason Scragzs: Bored
Paco Olvera Monterd: Office
Alex E. Proimos: Caïn venant de tuer son frère Abel, by Henry Vidal in Tuileries Garden
Nick Holland: Arm wrestling
social media icons
manicxminer : concentric circles shirt