Advanced Web Accessibility
Nick Ogrizovich, Universal Design Technology Lab
Roadmap for today
Accessibility in
a nutshell
Lawsuits and Legal Oh My!
WAOPD? (Formal
Policies at other edus?
Accessibility Evaluation Methods
Conformance Testing
Evaluation
User Types/Audience
Barrier Method Evaluations
“advanced” accessibility
Captcha agony
508 Procurement
Conclusion
What Does It Mean to Be Accessible?
Digital  Accessible
To Be Accessible
 The documents must be accessible
 The software used to play the documents must be
accessible
 The hardware on which the software and documents
are loaded must be accessible
 ALL three!
Example
 A document uploaded into a blackboard accessed by
a user with a laptop
 Document, LMS, laptop all must be accessible!
 Even the technical aspect of connecting to the network
 How hard is it to initially connect to UVM wireless?
 Student network 10.0.x.xx
 Requires reboot, limited networking (hope the redirect works
in all their browsers)
Please Note
 Most “e-books” are
not accessible!
 Most online books are
not accessible!
 Most CDs included
with textbooks are not
accessible!
 Most computer
support/study
programs are not
accessible!
Legal Aspects &
Lawsuits
Putting the Law in Context: Section 504 vs. Section 508
Access vs. Accommodation
Section 504 vs. Section 508
 Section 504 addresses individual disability needs.
 Section 508 addresses the infrastructure that allows
access.
Rehabilitation Act of 1973
 Section 504 is about accommodation.
 Disability service offices were created to deal with 504.
 Section 508 is about access.
 At its heart Section 508 is procurement law
 Campuswide responsibility
A Campus Analogy
 Section 504
 Deaf student requests
that videos for her class
be captioned
 Section 508
 New videos must be
captioned before being
shown in the classroom
for the first time
National Federation of the Blind (NFB)
 June 2009 – Sued Arizona State University
(and filed OCR and DOJ complaints against 5
others) over use of Amazon Kindle (settled in
Jan 2010)
 November 2010 – Filed OCR complaint against
Penn State University
 March 2011 – Filed DOJ complaint against
Northwestern and NYU over use of Google
Apps
NFB vs Penn State




Inaccessible library website
Inaccessible departmental websites
Inaccessible LMS (Angel)
Classroom technologies that are inaccessible to blind
faculty members
 Inaccessible financial services via contract with PNC
Bank
Mr. Goldstein
“The disparity between the quality of education offered nondisabled students and disabled students is, as a general matter,
increasing, simply because the amount of inaccessible
technology on the campus is proliferating… It sounds like a bad
problem for the students. But it’s actually a worse one for the
colleges and universities, because this is going to have to
change.”
Dan Goldstein at EDUCAUSE, October 20, 2011
Quote #2
“Each year that a school delays identifying where its
accessibility issues are and developing a plan of action, and
each year that a university doesn’t change its procurement
policy and continues to acquire new inaccessible technology
means that when you do finally decide to do something, it
will cost you a great deal more… My goal frankly is to get it
to the top of your to-do list, or as near to the top as I can get
it.”
Dan Goldstein at EDUCAUSE, October 20, 2011
Quote #3
“In terms of what to do…ending denial is the first
step and saying ‘You know, we’re inaccessible’; and then taking
stock of where you are inaccessible; and then coming up with an
action plan.…It’s important that the plan be public, with
deadlines.
The one thing you can go back and tell the general
counsel is: Dan Goldstein said he’s not going to file any suit if a
school has a comprehensive action plan up that says how they’re
going to become accessible.”
Dan Goldstein at EDUCAUSE, October 20, 2011
Formal Policies
Some Edu’s with formal policies













Oregon State University
University of Colorado at Boulder
University of Hawaii
University of Iowa
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
University of Texas at Austin
University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio
University of Toronto
The University of Washington
The University of Wisconsin
The University of Wisconsin-Madison
Washington State University
Worcester Polytechnic Institute
OSU Policy:
 Part I: Introduction
 Part II: Policy Statement
 Part III: Responsible Parties for Implementation of
this Policy
 Part IV: Compliance
 Part V: Definitions
 Part VI: Additional Contacts
grrrr….wheres
the…alt…text
Audiences
Designing for end users/devices
 Blind
 Low Vision
 Color Blindness
 Motor Impaired
 Motor Difficulties
 Deaf
 Cognitive Disabilities
Mobile Users
 Temporary Disabled
 Unusual Circumstance users
 Using a website during a
lecture
 Seniors, VETS, noviceinternet users
 Search Engines!
Mobile users=disabled desktop users
 “situationally-induced impairment”
 i.e. Giving a lecture and using website at same time
 Mobile devices present usability impairments
 Limitations in keyboard and screen size lead to:
 Inability to read color based info on screen in bright light
(similar experience for desktop users who have color
blindness)
 Recognize the limitations that are experienced by both!
 Saves time in development and testing
One study using BW:
 58% of the true barrier types were identified as
common between mobile and disabled users
 if the evaluation results for blind, low vision and
motor impaired users are aggregated then this
can be used to approximate results for mobile
web users

Yeliz Yesilada, Giorgio Brajnik, Simon Harper, Barriers common to mobile and disabled web users, Interacting
with Computers, Volume 23, Issue 5, September 2011, Pages 525-542, ISSN 0953-5438,
10.1016/j.intcom.2011.05.005.
Integrated Accessibility Guidelines
 WCAG for web content
 ATAG for authoring tools, HTML editors,
content management systems (CMS), blogs, wikis,
etc.
 UAAG for web browsers, media players, and
other ‘user agents’
 WAI-ARIA for accessible rich Internet
applications developed with Ajax and such
Evaluation Methods
Conformance Testing
How do we evaluate?
 Conformance Testing
 Potential Barrier Analysis (Barrier Walkthrough Method)
 (Giorgio Brajnik)
Conformance Testing
 Easy- just paste URL into evaluators…
 http://www.w3.org/WAI/RC/tools/complete
 Probably 300 apps/sites there
 Some are useful
 Exactly where error is (line number, too)
 Sometimes offer replacement fixed code
 Easiest ways to catch all the major
accessibility issues
Wai-act
WCAG
508
Wai-aria
Evaluation Methods
Barrier Walkthrough
Accessibility Level vs. conformance
 the BW can be used as a basis for measuring the
accessibility level of a website rather than measuring
the conformance level
• http://sole.dimi.uniud.it/~giorgio.brajnik/projects/bw/ Giorgio Brajnik
A barrier is a condition that restricts a
user's ability to carry out a goal
 the category of user and the type of disability
 the type of assistive technology being used
 the failure mode, that is the activity/task that is
hindered and how it is hindered, and
 which features in the page raise the barrier.
• http://sole.dimi.uniud.it/~giorgio.brajnik/projects/bw/ Giorgio Brajnik
Barrier Walk Through Method
 Conformance testing is difficult to apply correctly as it
is based on general and abstract principles that are
often difficult to specialize in order to make them
relevant and operational.
 Better to start from known types of problems rather
than using general design guidelines. (This is the same
approach you would follow when assessing security
of a web site: you'll start from known vulnerabilities.)
• http://sole.dimi.uniud.it/~giorgio.brajnik/projects/bw/ Giorgio Brajnik
BW method requires:
 to define the relevant user categories
 to define the relevant goals, and hence the relevant
pages to be tested and the relevant scenarios to be
considered
 to cross check relevant barriers with the selected
pages, and
 to determine the severity of each barrier.
• http://sole.dimi.uniud.it/~giorgio.brajnik/projects/bw/ Giorgio Brajnik
3 levels of impedance
Problem
Severity:
Barrier:
Minor
problem
• Is detectable by the user, but there are simple ways to overcome it
• is easy to remember
• Marginally affects productivity or satisfaction, but not effectiveness
nor safety.
Significant
problem
• is detected and it heavily affects the task execution
• not possible to avoid the barrier
• requires a substantial knowledge and/or memory
affects effectiveness, productivity, satisfaction and also safety
Critical
problem
• is such an obstacle that very often users do not reach their goals.
• has a strong negative impact on effectiveness, and consequently also
on productivity, satisfaction and safety
Barriers
CAPTCHA Agony
Trying to submit CAPTCHAs
Even a rage meme sprung up (inglip)
CAPTCHAs
 Just about completely inaccessible to screen readers
 Even an “accessible” one by CMU that was bought by
google
 Still inaccessible, despite:
?!!
Lots of work to make it accessible
JAVA, API’s & IDE’s
Accessibility API’s




Microsoft Active Accessibility (MSAA) (Microsoft)
IAccessible2 (Linux Foundation)
User Interface Automation (UIA) (Microsoft)
Linux Accessibility Toolkit (ATK) and Assistive
Technology - Service Provider Interface (AT-SPI)
(gnome.org)
 Mac OS X Accessibility Protocol (Apple)
Make JavaScript Accessible
 Ensure that JavaScript event handlers are device
independent (e.g., they do not require the use of a mouse)
 Make sure that your page does not
rely on JavaScript to function.
 Javascript can actually increase
accessibility- for example, tables
Exercise “Progressive Enhancement”
 Before: “graceful degradation”
 Build for “most users,” then implement hacks and
workarounds to provide accessibility.
 Progressive enhancement is different
 Build a site with code structured around content.
 Add bells and whistles using Flash and Javascript afterwards.
 Basic access to content is not restricted.
ACCESS keys
 Don’t use, depreciated
 Likewise with longdesc attribute
ARIA




Accessible Rich Internet Application
A means of exposing Roles, States and Properties
Robust support in current AT tools
Integrated into major UI JavaScript libraries (Dojo,
YUI3, jQuery UI)
 ARIA - http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/
 ARIA Authoring Practices - Useful for authors.
ARIA/HTML5
iOS and usability
“Great iOS Apps Embrace the Platform and HI Design
Principles”
- From App Store Developer Site at apple.com
 People deride apple
 Conformity, lack of flexibility, etc
 Why would Apple do this?
 Conformity can be good
 If all apps behave in similar ways and use conventionally
adopted expectations, a user would have little to no barriers
to successfully using the app on the first try
Captioned Video Content
Caption videos
* Captioned video is accessible to people
who can’t hear it
 Captions make video full-text searchable (YouTube)
 Captions can be automatically
translated to other languages
during playback (YouTube)
 Captions can be used to
generate an interactive
transcript (YouTube)
Provide a transcript
 Benefits individuals who are deaf-blind (easier to
read than captions with a Braille device)
 Benefits individuals with low Internet bandwidth
(who can’t play the media)
 Benefits all users by allowing them to access
content quickly
 Benefits Google, who indexes the content and
ranks them in results
UDTL provides captioning service
 Anyone Within The University using
Audio/Visual material for University
purposes.
 How does one make a Captioning
request?
 Follow the link ‘Captioning Request
Form’ at
http://www.uvm.edu/caption/
 Simply click on the link below the
‘faculty’ section, provide the
information required, submit the
form and await our reply!
 For more information, contact
Steven Airoldi (caption@uvm.edu)
Demand Accessibility!
Ideal World
 Accessibility needs to be considered right from the
beginning
 Ask at the start, Is the purchase E&IT?
 If it is, then use the procurement process for buying
accessible under Section 508.
Partnership Model
 San José State
 Disability services, information services, and procurement
work together to implement Section 508
Probably never any salt
on these sidewalks…
San José State Solution
 Requestor gathers documentation
 Determines business needs and generates three product
suggestions—works with IT to determine functional needs
 Submits packet to procurement
 Procurement checks for completeness
 Packet goes to disability services
 Disability services checks accessibility scores
 Packet returned to procurement for final check-off
and purchase
Ask vendors specific questions about
accessibility of their products
 Is your product accessible?
 Do you have a Voluntary Product Accessibility Template (VPAT)?
 Can you demonstrate how to operate your product without a
mouse?
 What sort of testing have you done with users with disabilities?
(probe for details)
 (Fact check their answers with other users)
Demand accessibility!
 Not accessible? Don’t buy it. Don’t use it. Don’t support it.
 If no comparable product is accessible, buy it only with the
understanding that the vendor must address its accessibility
shortcomings.
 Work to implement policies on your campus that require IT
purchases to be accessible.
Hold vendors accountable
 Representations and Warranties.
Vendor represents and warrants that [the product] is fully accessible to
persons with disabilities in accordance with Title II of the Americans
with Disabilities Act [or Title III for private institutions] and Section 504
of the Rehabilitation Act [or delete the “and” and add your state
statute after the Rehab Act] and further hereby indemnifies University
from all claims, liability and damages for any violation of those statutes
traceable to Vendor’s [product].
Conclusions
Accessibility is NOT
 about technology
 about standards
 about policy
Resources
Resources - General
 Section 508, Accessible IT: http://www.section508.gov/
 Georgia Tech Research Institute, State IT Database:
http://accessibility.gtri.gatech.edu/sitid/stateLawAtGlance.php
 Worldwide Web Consortium (W3C): http://www.w3.org/
 National Federation of the Blind: http://nfb.org/
 EDUCAUSE: http://www.educause.edu/
Resources - Testing Accessibility
 WAVE: http://wave.webaim.org/
 HiSoftware® Cynthia Says™:
http://www.contentquality.com/
 FAE: http://fae.cita.uiuc.edu/
 Barrier Walktrough Tool:
http://sole.dimi.uniud.it/~giorgio.brajnik/projects/bw/
API Accessibility




Microsoft Active Accessibility (MSAA) (Microsoft)
IAccessible2 (Linux Foundation)
User Interface Automation (UIA) (Microsoft)
Linux Accessibility Toolkit (ATK) and Assistive Technology Service Provider Interface (AT-SPI) (gnome.org)
 Mac OS X Accessibility Protocol (Apple)
 ARIA http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/
Contact





Nick Ogrizovich – nogrizov@uvm.edu
Nick Hall – nbhall@uvm.edu
ASP Tech – asptech@uvm.edu
Captioning – caption@uvm.edu
Universal Design Technology Lab telephone: (802)
656-5537
Resources: Websites
 Center for Plain Language:
http://centerforplainlanguage.org
 PlainLanguage.gov: http://www.plainlanguage.gov
 Plain Language Association International:
http://www.plainlanguagenetwork.org
Resources: Writing Content
 Content and Usability: Web Writing:
http://www.webcredible.co.uk/user-friendlyresources/web-usability/web-content.shtml
Resources: POUR
 WCAG 2.0 Principles of Accessibility:
http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDINGWCAG20/intro.html
 Constructing a POUR Website:
http://webaim.org/articles/pour/