Smarter Accessibility Technical Standards

crookpatedhatΚινητά – Ασύρματες Τεχνολογίες

10 Δεκ 2013 (πριν από 3 χρόνια και 6 μήνες)

85 εμφανίσεις

© 2011 IBM Corporation

Smarter Accessibility Technical Standards


Phill Jenkins

IBM Research

Human Ability & Accessibility Center


April 2011

© 2011 IBM Corporation

Human Ability and Accessibility Center

2

About the U.S. Access Board

25 board members
:

o
13

Public members appointed by
the President to four year terms


o
12 Federal members:

o
Justice

o
GSA

o
Interior

o
Labor

o
Defense

o
Transportation

o
Education

o
Housing and Urban Development

o
Post Office (USPS)

o
Commerce

o
Health and Human Services

o
Veterans’ Affairs

o
Independent Federal Agency

o
$7.3 million budget

o
28 employees


Rule making in progress

o
Emergency Transportable Housing

o
Passenger Vessels

o
Transportation Vehicles

o
Outdoor Developed Areas

o
Shared Use Paths

o
Public Rights of Way

o
Classroom Acoustics

o
Medical Diagnostic Equipment

o
Information & Communications
Technologies (ICT)

o
Self
-
Service Transaction Machines

© 2011 IBM Corporation

Human Ability and Accessibility Center

3

o
Guidelines and standards development

o
ABA: Architectural Barriers Act of 1968

o
ADA: Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990

o
Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Section 255)

o
Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1998 (Section 508)

o
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010


o
Technical assistance and training


o
Research


o
Compliance and enforcement

U.S. Access Board programs

© 2011 IBM Corporation

Human Ability and Accessibility Center

4


Joint update of:


Section 508
standards

for electronic and information
technology (procured by Federal agencies)


Section 255
guidelines

for telecommunications


Advisory Committee (TEITAC) report


April 3, 2008


A
dvance
n
otice of
p
roposed
r
ulemaking
(ANPRM)



March 22, 2010


Next step


proposed rules
(NPRM)

ICT Accessibility Standards & Guidelines

© 2011 IBM Corporation

Human Ability and Accessibility Center

5


Adobe Systems, Inc.

o
American Association of People with Disabilities

o
American Council of the Blind (ACB)

o
American Foundation for the Blind (AFB)


AOL LLC


Apple, Inc.


Association of Assistive Technology Act
Programs


Assistive Technology Industry Association
(ATIA)


AT&T


Avaya, Inc.


Canon USA, Inc.

o
Communication Service for the Deaf


CTIA
-

The Wireless Association


Dell, Inc.

o
Easter Seals


European Commission


o
Hearing Loss Association of America


Human Rights and Equal Opportunity
Commission (Australia)


IBM


Inclusive Technologies


Industry Canada



Information Technology Association of America


Information Technology Industry Council


Japanese Standards Association



Microsoft Corporation


National Association of State Chief Information
Officers

o
National Center on Disability and Access to
Education

o
National Federation of the Blind (NFB)


National Network of Disability and Business
Technical Assistance Centers


Panasonic Corporation of North America

o
Paralyzed Veterans of America


SRA International, Inc.


Sun Microsystems, Inc.


Telecommunications Industry Association


The Paciello Group, LLP


Trace Research and Development Center


Usability Professionals’ Association


U.S. Department of Homeland Security


U.S. Social Security Administration


WGBH National Center for Accessible Media


World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)


Web
Accessibility Initiative (WAI)


ICT Advisory Committee (TEITAC)

© 2011 IBM Corporation

Human Ability and Accessibility Center

6

o
In November 2010, the Board decided to
separate

the
rulemaking on ADA self
-
service transaction machines
from the rulemaking on ICT (508/255)

o
Departments of Transportation (DOT) and Justice (DOJ)
are undertaking
related

rulemakings that present an
opportunity to work collaboratively to develop a single
set of technical requirements that would be referenced
and scoped by each agency

o
Next step


proposed rule


Self
-
Service Transaction Machines

© 2011 IBM Corporation

Human Ability and Accessibility Center

7

Participating on technical committees:

Election Assistance Commission (EAC.gov)

-

Board of Advisors

-

Technical Guidelines Development Committee (TGDC)


Consulting on Rulemakings:

-

Section 255 (FCC);

-

Medical Diagnostic Equipment (FDA);

-

Outdoor Trails (Federal land management agencies);

-

Section 508 (GSA, DOJ)


Research:


National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

(NIDRR) (Department of Education)

Collaboration with other agencies

© 2011 IBM Corporation

Human Ability and Accessibility Center

8

Technical accessibility standards

Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Standards and Guidelines

(Draft published in U.S. Federal Register 22 March 2010):

www.access
-
board.gov/sec508/refresh/draft
-
rule.htm

Policy application

U.S. Section 508 of Rehabilitation Act

Applies to ICT that is procured,
developed, maintained, or used.

U.S. Section 255 of Telecommunications Act

Applies to manufacturers of
telecommunications products.

U.S. American with Disabilities Act Accessibility
Guidelines (ADAAG)

Applies to buildings and facilities
covered in the ADA

W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0

Applies level A and AA provisions to
web content.

U.S. 21
st

Century Communications and Video
Accessibility Act of 2010 (FCC)

Applies to providers of advanced
telecommunications.

© 2011 IBM Corporation

Human Ability and Accessibility Center

9

Proposed ICT standards & guidelines

Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Standards and Guidelines

(Draft published in U.S. Federal Register 22 March 2010):

www.access
-
board.gov/sec508/refresh/draft
-
rule.htm

Chapters of provisions

Description


200 Functional performance criteria

Without vision, without hearing, . . .


300 Common functionality

Biometrics, color, operable parts, . . .


400 Platforms, applications, & interactive content

Software accessibility


500 Electronic Documents

Text, forms, tables, etc


600 Media

Audio and video content


700 Hardware

Reach, connections, text labels


800 Audio output (TV speakers)

Interactive, held to ear


900 Conversational functionality

Video phone in TV?


1000 Support documentation and services

User manuals and help desk

© 2011 IBM Corporation

Human Ability and Accessibility Center

10

WCAG 1.0
(May 1999)

vs WCAG 2.0
( Dec 2008)

WCAG 1.0
Standard




18 Checkpoints



Rationale



Techniques



Test Procedures



Examples



How To Test

WCAG 1.0 Techniques

WCAG 2.0
Standard



12 Guidelines/4 Principles



61 Success Criteria



25 Level A



13 Level AA



23 Level AAA

Understanding WCAG 2.0



Rationale and Benefits



Examples



Sufficient Techniques

WCAG 2.0 Techniques



General (G1
-
G199)



HTML (H2
-
H91)



CSS (C6
-
C63)



SCRIPT (SCR1
-
37)



SERVER (SVR1
-
4)



SMIL (SM1
-
14)



TEXT (T1
-
T3)



ARIA (ARIA1
-
4)



Common Failures (F1
-
F89)

How to Meet

Interactive


gives views by priority and technology

508

Techniques

IBM

Techniques

References:

© 2011 IBM Corporation

Human Ability and Accessibility Center

11

Notes:


Links are active
. The link takes you to the source reference
documentation at the W3C Web Accessibility Initiative web site.



1.2 Time
-
based Media

Recommendation to watch the FCC rulemaking process on the

U.S. 21
st

Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010

Understanding Level A
-

25 requirements

12
Guidelines

25 Success Criteria (Level A)

3.1

Readable

3.1.1

Language of Page

3.2

Predictable

3.2.1

On Focus

3.2.2

On Input

3.3

Input Assistance

3.3.1

Error Identification

3.3.2

Labels or Instructions

4.1

Compatible

4.1.1

Parsing

4.1.2

Name, Role, Value

12
Guidelines

25 Success Criteria (Level A)

1.1

Text Alternative

1.1.1

Non
-
Text Content

1.2

Time
-
based
Media

1.2.1

Audio
-
only and Video
-
only (Prerecorded)

1.2.2

Captions (Prerecorded)

1.2.3

Audio Descriptions or Captions
(Prerecorded)

1.3

Adaptable

1.3.1

Info and Relationships

1.3.2

Meaningful Sequence

1.3.3

Sensory Characteristics

1.4

Distinguishable

1.4.1

Use of colour

1.4.2

Audio Control

2.1

Keyboard
Accessible

2.1.1

Keyboard

2.1.2

No Keyboard Trap

2.2

Enough Time

2.2.1

Timing Adjustable

2.2.2

Pause, Stop, Hide

2.3

Seizures

2.3.1

Three Flashes or Below Threshold

2.4

Navigable

2.4.1

Bypass Blocks

2.4.2

Page Title

2.4.3

Focus Order

2.4.4

Link Purpose (In Context)

© 2011 IBM Corporation

Human Ability and Accessibility Center

12

Evolution of WCAG 1.0 to WCAG 2.0

WCAG 1.0


WCAG 1.0 was published in May 1999.

Can you remember what the “Information Superhighway” looked like 12 years ago?


Accessibility checkpoints were: P1 (
must

satisfy), P2 (
should

satisfy) and P3 (
may

satisfy).

These priority levels cumulatively map to WCAG 1.0 conformance levels of A, AA and AAA.


Focus on static HTML conformance and enabling support with the early assistive technology:


Images for content and navigation (alt text), scripts, forms, Skip to Main Content,
Frames, Table Headers, Cascading Style Sheets, Colour & Contrast, Blinking,
Moving or Flickering Content, Timed Responses, Text
-
Only Page, Descriptive
Hypertext Links, Correct Markup to Convey Presentation & Structure


Technology in May 1999:



Dialup Internet for home was common


Windows 98


Internet Explorer 5, Netscape 4.5


JAWS 3 screen reader


issues with poor JavaScript support


No smart phones


Assistive technology was a niche field and very expensive.

© 2011 IBM Corporation

Human Ability and Accessibility Center

13

Evolution of WCAG 1.0 to WCAG 2.0

WCAG 2.0


Many of the P1 & P2 checkpoints are incorporated into WCAG 2.0 Level A Success Criteria.


That is, the base of WCAG 2.0 (A) is
significantly

more comprehensive and capable in terms of
enabling access to the web than WCAG 1.0 P1 was.


WCAG 2.0 was published in December 2008:


25 Level A success criteria


13 Level AA success criteria


23 Level AAA success criteria.



Note: It is not recommended that Level AAA conformance be required as a general policy for
entire sites because it is not possible to satisfy all Level AAA Success Criteria for some content.


More about the success criteria on the next pages …


Technology in 2008:


pervasive high speed internet access, multiple channels & devices


Content includes video (e.g. YouTube), audio


Growth of collaboration spaces


blogs, SharePoint, instant messaging


Windows XP and Vista, Linux on the desktop


Rich internet experience


Flash, Silverlight and other rich Internet media formats.


Internet Explorer 7, Firefox 3, Chrome, Opera, Safari


Smart phones


RIM, Apple, etc. Beginning the explosive growth phase of smart phones like
Blackberry and iPhone, Android and now the Windows phones.


13 months before the introduction of the iPad


tablets were a tiny niche in 2008

© 2011 IBM Corporation

Human Ability and Accessibility Center

14

Differences between Level A and AA


testable success criteria

Success Criteria




For each guideline, testable success criteria are provided to allow WCAG 2.0 to be
used where requirements and conformance testing are necessary such as in design
specification, web application development, product purchasing, regulation, and
contractual agreements.



The following conditions must be met for a Success Criterion to be included at all:


1.
All Success Criteria must be important access issues for people with disabilities
that address problems
beyond the usability problems that might be faced by all
users
. In other words, the access issue must cause a proportionately greater
problem for people with disabilities than it causes people without disabilities in
order to be considered an accessibility issue (and covered under these
accessibility guidelines).


2.
All Success Criteria
must also be testable
. This is important since otherwise it
would not be possible to determine whether a page met or failed to meet the
Success Criteria. The Success Criteria can be tested by a combination of machine
and human evaluation as long as it is possible to determine whether a Success
Criterion has been satisfied with a high level of confidence.



© 2011 IBM Corporation

Human Ability and Accessibility Center

15

Differences between Level A and AA

Levels



In order to meet the needs of different groups of persons with disabilities and different situations,
three levels of conformance are defined: A (lowest), AA, and AAA (highest).



Success Criteria were assigned to one of the three levels of conformance by the working group
after taking into consideration a wide range of interacting issues.



Some of the common factors evaluated when setting the level included:

1.
whether the Success Criterion is
essential

(in other words, if the Success Criterion isn't met,
then even assistive technology can't make content accessible) or whether there are no
workarounds if the Success Criteria is not met (Level A).

2.
whether it is
possible to satisfy

the Success Criterion for
all Web sites and types of content
that
the Success Criteria would apply to (e.g., different topics, types of content, types of Web
technology)

3.
whether the Success Criterion requires
skills that could reasonably be achieved
by the content
creators (that is, the knowledge and skill to meet the Success Criteria could be acquired in a
week's training or less)

4.
whether the Success Criterion would
impose limits on the "look & feel" and/or function
of the
Web page. (limits on function, presentation, freedom of expression, design or aesthetic that the
Success Criteria might place on authors)

5.
whether the need could
more efficiently be met by the browser (not the content
). See Agent
Accessibility Guidelines (UAAG)



© 2011 IBM Corporation

Human Ability and Accessibility Center

16

Differences between Level A and AA continued

Accessibility Supported



Many of the Success Criteria deal with providing accessibility

1.
through assistive technologies (AT) or

2.
special accessibility features in mainstream browsers, or both



Success Criteria require that something be done in
Web content

that would allow
assistive technologies to successfully present the content's information to the user:

1.
For example, a 'show captions' option in a media player.

2.
For example, a picture that you were supposed to click on to go to a topic would not be
accessible to a person who was blind unless a text alternative for the picture were
provided in a
way

that browsers including AT can find and present it to the user. The key here is that the text
alternative must be
included in a way
that browsers including AT can understand and use


in a
way that is "Accessibility Supported.“

3.
For example, custom controls or widgets (carousel, some pop
-
ups, etc.), included on a Web
page. In this case, a standard browser may not ordinarily be able to present an
alternative

to the
user. If, however, information
about

the custom control including its
name
,
role
,
value
,
how to
set it etc
. are provided in a way that assistive technologies can understand and control them,
then users with supporting assistive technologies will be able to use them.



When
new

technologies are introduced, two things must happen:

1.
First, the
new technologies

must be designed in a way that browsers including assistive
technologies
could access
all the information they need to present the content to the user.

2.
Secondly, the
browsers and assistive technologies
may need to be redesigned or modified to be
able to actually work with these new technologies.




"Accessibility Supported" means that both of these have been done and that the technology will
work with browsers and assistive technologies.




© 2011 IBM Corporation

Human Ability and Accessibility Center

17

Differences between Level A and AA continued

Assistive Technology support needed for "Accessibility Supported“ new Web technologies


This topic raises the question of how many or which assistive technologies (AT) must support a Web technology in order for
that Web technology to be considered "accessibility supported".


WCAG 2.0 does not specify which or how many AT must support a Web technology in order for it to be classified as
“accessibility supported”. This is a complex topic and one that varies both by environment, by language, and changes
over time. There is a continued need for an international dialogue on this topic:




“Accessibility supported” varies by environment


Inside an enterprise where all employees are provided with particular user agents and assistive technologies, Web
technologies may need to
only

be supported by those user agents and those assistive technologies.


Content posted to the public Web may need to work with a broader range of user agents and AT.


“Accessibility supported” varies by language (and dialect)


There are different levels of assistive technologies support in different languages and even countries.


Some environments or countries may provide free, but not fully supporting assistive technologies.


New technologies won't be supported in older assistive technologies


Clearly, a new web technology cannot be supported by all past assistive technologies, so requiring that a
technology be supported by
all

assistive technologies
is not possible
.


Users will need to update, upgrade, re
-
configure, and be trained to use new assistive technology support


Support for a single older assistive technology
(for a given disability)
is usually not sufficient


Newer Assistive Technologies may not be affordable by the general public


When capabilities of free or low cost AT are improved, then much of the burden is removed from the Web content
owner / developer.


The difficult “costs tradeoff equation” between many web sites owners and the fewer ATs needs to be addressed.

© 2011 IBM Corporation

Human Ability and Accessibility Center

18

Questions to ask when setting policy regarding Level AA

When should Level AA requirements become part of a policy, regulation, procurement, design specifications,
or contractual agreements?


This question raises many possible considerations and factors that need to be take into account for each Success Criteria.
Some notes to help in understanding and exploring this topic are:




Should each Level AA “Success Criteria” be evaluated individually?


Yes
-

It is not necessarily “all” or “none”; and can (should?) change over time.



Costs tradeoffs between all web sites owners meeting the requirement vs working with the smaller
community of browser and AT developers to meet the requirement?



Should each Level AA “Success Criteria” apply differently


depending on:


Type of Jurisdiction: public web sites, private, company, university, business, news, gaming, etc.


Type of Content: e
-
commerce (retail), training (education), job application, informational video, entertainment, etc.


Type of Hardware Platform: Desktop browser, Mobile Phone browser, Tablet browser, etc.



Could the Level AA “Success Criteria” be easily enforced in authoring and developer tools?


Are there content creation & development tools that support W3C Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines (ATAG)?


What is the support (or lack of) by each specific criteria? For example, video descriptions
1.2.5

?



Other factors:


Subjective human evaluation required? “Testable” does not mean only “machine testable”.


Changes and progress since 2008? Are more accessibility features built into browsers and platforms?
(yes)


How does (or doesn’t) making the Level AA a policy requirement drive innovation up and costs down?


Limits on the “Look & Feel” ( e.g., logos, branding), functions, presentation, freedom of expression, design or
aesthetic that are placed on the web content owner / author / developer.

© 2011 IBM Corporation

Human Ability and Accessibility Center

19

WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA checkpoints

Details of WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA




The table on the following pages summarizes each of the guidelines and the related success criteria in
WCAG 2.0, for Level A and AA.


Notes are provided summarizing each of the criteria.


Guidelines are listed in the second column.


Level A criteria are listed in the third column


click the link to get more details from W3C.



Level AA criteria are listed in the fourth column


click the link for more details from W3C.



Notes are provided in the fifth column.


For the Level A criteria, the notes will simply recap the W3C description. There are no
contentious Level A criteria.
You can skip the details of the Level A notes
.



For the Level AA criteria,
questions and comments are provided
. These are prefaced with “
AA:”
and are in larger text to focus your discussion.

© 2011 IBM Corporation

Human Ability and Accessibility Center

20

WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA checkpoints

WCAG 2.0
Guideline

number

12 Guidelines
(summarized)

25

Level A

Success Criteria

13

Level AA

Success Criteria

Notes & discussion

1.1

Text
Alternative

1.1.1

Non
-
Text Content

All non
-
text content presented to users has text
alternative that serves the equivalent purpose, exceptions
exist.

1.2

Time
-
based
Media

1.2.1

Audio
-
only and
Video
-
only
(Prerecorded)

Equivalent alternative provided for time
-
based media.

1.2

Time
-
based
Media

1.2.2

Captions
(Prerecorded)

Captions are provided for all pre
-
recorded audio content
in synchronized media.

1.2

Time
-
based
Media

1.2.3

Audio descriptions
or Captions (P
rerecorded)


An alternative for time
-
based media or audio description
of the pre
-
recorded video content is provided .

1.2

Time
-
based
Media

1.2.4

Captions (Live)

AA:

Captions provided for all live audio content;
such as a live newscast delivered over the Internet.

1. What are the current and future requirements
placed on existing broadcast media?

2. When will tools & technology be available to
facilitate?

3. Required investment?

4. Which languages?

1.2

Time
-
based
Media

1.2.5


Audio
Description
(Pre
-
recorded)

AA:
Audio descriptions provided for all pre
-
recorded video content in synchronized media.

1. What are the current and future requirements
placed on existing media?

2. When will tools be available to facilitate?

3. Which languages?

4. When are alternatives sufficient?


© 2011 IBM Corporation

Human Ability and Accessibility Center

21

WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA checkpoints

WCAG 2.0
Guideline
number

12 Guidelines
(summarized)

25

Level A

Success Criteria

13

Level AA

Success Criteria

Notes & discussion

1.3

Adaptable

1.3.1

Info and
Relationships


Information, structure, and relationships conveyed through
presentation can be programmatically determined or are
available in text.

1.3

Adaptable

1.3.2

Meaningful

Sequence



When the sequence in which content is presented affects its
meaning, a correct reading sequence can be
programmatically determined.

1.3

Adaptable

1.3.3

Sensory

Characteristics



Instructions provided for understanding and operating
content do not rely solely on sensory characteristics of
components such as shape, size, visual location, orientation,
or sound.

© 2011 IBM Corporation

Human Ability and Accessibility Center

22

WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA checkpoints

WCAG 2.0
Guideline
number

12 Guidelines
(summarized)

25

Level A

Success Criteria

13

Level AA

Success Criteria

Notes & discussion

1.4

Distinguishable

1.4.1

Use of color

Color is not used as the only visual means of conveying
information, indicating an action, prompting a response, or
distinguishing a visual element.

1.4

Distinguishable

1.4.2

Audio Control

If any audio on a Web page plays automatically for more than
3 seconds, either a mechanism is available to pause or stop
the audio, or a mechanism is available to control audio
volume independently from the overall system volume level.

1.4

Distinguishable

1.4.3

Contrast
(minimum)

AA:

Contrast (minimum 4.5:1) except for large
text at 3:1, incidental text and images, and logos.

This may be a challenge regarding corporate
branding of many sites.


1.4

Distinguishable

1.4.4

Resize text

AA:
Resize text except for captions and images of
text, up to 2X without assistive technology.

May rely on browser zoom support to satisfy this
success criterion (available in ‘modern’ browsers
and on smart phones).

1.4

Distinguishable

1.4.5

Images of text

AA:
Images of text: Text is used rather than
images of text except where customizable or
essential.



Browser zoom support improved; adequate
replacement today?

© 2011 IBM Corporation

Human Ability and Accessibility Center

23

WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA checkpoints

WCAG 2.0
Guideline
number

12 Guidelines
(summarized)

25

Level A

Success Criteria

13

Level AA

Success Criteria

Notes & discussion

2.1

Keyboard
Accessible

2.1.1

Keyboard

All functionality of the content is operable through a
keyboard interface without requiring specific timings for
individual keystrokes …

2.1

Keyboard
Accessible

2.1.2

No keyboard
traps

If keyboard focus can be moved to a component of the
page using a keyboard interface, then focus can be moved
away from that component using only a keyboard
interface, and, if it requires more than unmodified arrow or
tab keys or other standard exit methods, the user is
advised of the method for moving focus away.

2.2

Enough Time

2.2.1

Timing
adjustable

Time limits


turn off, adjust, extend, real time exception,
essential exception, 20
-
hour exception.

2.2

Enough Time

2.2.2

Pause, stop,
hide

For moving, blinking, scrolling, or auto
-
updating
information, all of the following are true


ability to pause,
stop or hide the scroll,

2.3

Seizures

2.3.1

Three Flashes
or Below
Threshold

Web pages do not contain anything that flashes more than
three times in any one second period, or the flash is below
the general flash and red flash thresholds.

© 2011 IBM Corporation

Human Ability and Accessibility Center

24

WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA checkpoints

WCAG 2.0
Guideline
number

12 Guidelines
(summarized)

25

Level A

Success Criteria

13

Level AA

Success Criteria

Notes & discussion

2.4

Navigable


2.4.1

Bypass Blocks

A mechanism is available to bypass blocks of content that are
repeated on multiple Web pages.

2.4

Navigable


2.4.2

Page Title

Web pages have titles that describe topic or purpose.

2.4

Navigable


2.4.3

Focus Order

If a Web page can be navigated sequentially and the
navigation sequences affect meaning or operation, focusable
components receive focus in an order that preserves meaning
and operability.

2.4

Navigable


2.4.4

Link Purpose (In
Context)

The purpose of each link can be determined from the link text
alone or from the link text together with its programmatically
determined link context, except where the purpose of the link
would be ambiguous to users in general.

2.4

Navigable


2.4.5

Multiple Ways

AA:

Multiple Ways: to locate a page in a set of
pages except where it is a step in a process.
Satisfy with search, multiple navigation,
breadcrumb trail, site map, etc.

Best practice for user experience, this benefits everyone.

2.4

Navigable


2.4.6

Headings and
Labels

AA:

Headings and Labels: describe topic or
purpose.

Note: requires subjective human evaluation

Best practice for user experience, this benefits everyone.

2.4

Navigable


2.4.7

Focus visible

AA:

Focus visible: any keyboard operable
interface has a mode for visible focus indicator.

Browser override vs. author provided?

© 2011 IBM Corporation

Human Ability and Accessibility Center

25

WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA checkpoints

WCAG 2.0
Guideline
number

12 Guidelines
(summarized)

25

Level A

Success Criteria

13

Level AA

Success Criteria

Notes & discussion

3.1

Readable

3.1.1

Language
of Page

The default human language of each Web page can be
programmatically determined.

3.1

Readable

3.1.2

Language of
Parts

AA:

Language of Parts: each passage or phrase
is identified.



Benefit beyond issues faced by all users?


3.2

Predictable

3.2.1

On Focus

When any component receives focus, it does not initiate a
change of context.

3.2

Predictable

3.2.2

On Input

Changing the setting of any user interface component does
not automatically cause a change of context unless the user
has been advised of the behavior before using the
component.

3.2

Predictable

3.2.3

Consistent
Navigation

AA:

Consistent Navigation: encourage
consistent presentation and layout.

Note


requires subjective human evaluation

Best practice for user experience benefits everyone.

3.2

Predictable

3.2.4

Consistent
Identification

AA:

Consistent Identification: components with
same functionality are identified consistently.

Note


requires subjective human evaluation

Best practice for user experience benefits everyone.

© 2011 IBM Corporation

Human Ability and Accessibility Center

26

WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA checkpoints

WCAG 2.0
Guideline
number

12 Guidelines
(summarized)

25

Level A

Success Criteria

13

Level AA

Success Criteria

Notes & discussion

3.3

Input
assistance

3.3.1

Error
Identification

If an input error is automatically detected, the item that is in
error is identified and the error is described to the user in text.

3.3

Input
assistance

3.3.2

Labels or
Instructions

Labels or instructions are provided when content requires
user input.


3.3

Input
assistance

3.3.3

Error Suggestion

AA:

Error Suggestions: provided to user except
for security or purpose.

Benefit beyond issues faced by all users?
Risk =
Note: requires subjective human evaluation

Best practice for user experience benefits everyone.

3.3

Input
assistance

3.3.4

Error Prevention
(Legal, Financial,
Data)

AA:

Error Prevention (Legal, Financial, Data): for
commitments provide reversible, checked, or
confirmation. All users?

Note: requires subjective human evaluation

Best practice for user experience benefits everyone.

4.1

Compatible

4.1.1

Parsing

In content implemented using markup languages, elements
have complete start and end tags, elements are nested
according to their specifications …

4.1

Compatible

4.1.2

Name, Role,
Value

For all user interface components (including but not limited to:
form elements, links and components generated by scripts),
the name and role can be programmatically determined;
states, properties, and values that can be set by the user can
be programmatically set …

© 2011 IBM Corporation

Human Ability and Accessibility Center

27

FYI …

What’s happening in:




Canada


Federal lawsuit in November 2010 ordered the Government of Canada to make its Internet
web sites accessible within 15 months.


Manitoba has started public dialogue on accessibility standards.


Quebec standards underway


public sector website.



United States



Standards refresh underway


very comprehensive


web, technology, telecom, kiosks.


US standards influence multi
-
level government procurement policies


highly influential


Justice department position


private sector web sites are an extension of a physical place of
business and therefore subject to anti
-
discrimination laws (Americans with Disabilities Act).


Target is an examples of large American company that has been successfully held
accountable in court and have settled litigation at $6 million.



Australia


Federal, state and territorial government sites to WCAG 2.0 A by Dec. 2012


Federal sites to AA by Dec. 2014, states and territories to AA or AAA


Applies to all government websites (Internet, Intranet)



Japan, China, Britain, European Union


All moving to adopt WCAG or WCAG
-
based web standards

© 2011 IBM Corporation

Human Ability and Accessibility Center

28

'CSUN 2011
', the largest annual conference on technology and persons
with disabilities. Over the years, the conference has grown to almost
5,000 participants, with presenters and exhibitors representing the U.S.
Federal government, all 50 states, numerous universities and
industries, and over 35 foreign countries:


We will briefly cover the following sessions:


WEB
-
2045

Making Web Applications (WAI/ARIA) More Accessible

DHH
-
2003

IBM AbilityLab Digital Media Captioner and Editor

WEB
-
3049

HTML 5 Accessibility Panel

WEB
-
2040

Advancing Mobile Usability and Access for Everyone

WEB
-
2032

Accessible Analytics: Complex Charts, Large Datasets, and
Node Diagrams

CSUN 2011 Technology presentation