Slide 1

Testing for Accessibility and Usability Is Your Site Accessible and Usable or Just Conformant?

Slide 2

Presenters Jason White Co-Chair, Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Naomi Heagney The Hiser Group Andrew Arch Vision Australia Foundation

Slide 3

W3C and Accessibility Success Criteria Jason White

Slide 4

WCAG 1.0 Issues with conformance

Slide 5

WCAG 2.0 Testable success criteria Abstraction and specificity Definition of testability Either machine testable or human testable Introduction of review requirements into success criteria E.g. text equivalent

Slide 6

WCAG 2.0 continued WCAG 2.0 is multi layered Design principles Guidelines and Checkpoints Techniques for technologies Test cases as part of techniques Machine testable Human testable Non-testable

Slide 7

A Usability Perspective Naomi Heagney

Slide 8

Usability & Accessibility What is Usability? Similarities and differences Focus Resources Method Standards and legislation

Slide 9

What is Usability? Usability is the extent to which a product can be used by specified users to achieve specified goals with effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction in a specified context of use. Definition from ISO 9241-11

Slide 10

What is Usability? User Centred Design (UCD) is an iterative and collaborative methodology: Analysis Design Evaluation Usability is not just lab testing Reviews, walkthroughs, in-situ testing

Slide 11

Similarities The people Involvement in development processes Integrated The earlier the better Need knowledge of: Target audience Personal characteristics

Slide 12

Differences Focus Conformance versus site improvement Qualitative & quantitative data Measures for usability are project-specific Resources Different specialist knowledge required

Slide 13

Differences Evaluation methods Less emphasis on automated tools Variety of techniques, scalable to project constraints Standards & legislation Focus on process rather than product WCAG & checkpoints provide excellent basis for legislative support

Slide 14

Accessibility Testing Andrew Arch

Slide 15

Concept and Design Review Critical consideration of end-to-end process Identify: Objective Options for implementation Assess strategies that could be used Consider requirements on the user

Slide 16

Manual Checking Requires knowledge and understanding Involves: Reviewing content Reviewing code User testing

Slide 17

Site Testing by Assistive Technology Users Complements technical accessibility testing, but does not replace it. Purpose is to appreciate usability issues for users of assistive technology. User testing CANNOT determine if a site or online object works with all assistive technology. User testers need to be skilled, but not expert with their technology.

Slide 18

Technical Accessibility Checking Automated Tools All do a partial job All have flaws or weaknesses Interpretation needed (manual checking and rectification) Many pseudo tools are available by using the options included as standard within your computer

Slide 19

Evaluation & Repair Tools Browser settings Built-in checking Colour checkers Link checkers The Wave A-Prompt Tidy Code validators Commercial Tools Full list: http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/existingtools.html

Slide 20

Pseudo Tools Browser Setting Options Change the font to a larger size View pages without images View pages with styles sheets and pages colours/fonts disabled View pages with an alternative, high contrast, colour scheme Use the keyboard not the mouse to navigate Disable scripts, applets and/or plugins Try different browsers & versions

Slide 21

Built in Checking eg. Dreamweaver See also WAI Authoring Tools guidelines

Slide 22

Colour Checkers Colour Contrast http://www.lighthouse.org/ color_contrast.htm http://aprompt.snow.utoronto.ca/ ColorVisibilityProgram.html (Beta version) Colour tester colour blind http://www.tesspub.com/colours.html http://www.vischeck.com/ Legible text http://www.lighthouse.org/print_leg.htm

Slide 23

Link Checkers Link checkers: non-existent URLs http://www.linkalarm.com/ http://www.tetranetsoftware.com/ solutions/linkbot/looking-for-linkbot.asp http://www.cyberspyder.com/cslnkts1.html http://validator.w3.org/checklink Cannot check for incorrect addresses

Slide 24

The Wave Pros Visual Shows reading order Shows logical structure Shows suspect ALT text Identifies scripts as a potential accessibility issue Cons No fixes No recommendations http://www.temple.edu/inst_disabilities/piat/wave/

Slide 25

A-Prompt Pros Offers repairs Alt text registry Cons Slow to use Repairs code Interactive http://www.aprompt.ca/

Slide 26

Tidy Pros Offers to fix code Formats HTML Works with HTML/XHTML/ Cleans up Word conversions Advice on accessibility & internationalisation Pros cont GUI front-end available Interfaces with several authoring tools Cons Very technical http://www.w3.org/people/Raggett/tidy/

Slide 27

Code Validators HTML Validator W3C: http://validator.w3.org/ NetMechanic, WebDesignGroup CSS Validator http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/ SMIL Validator http://www.cwi.nl/~media/symm/validator/

Slide 28

Site Evaluation & Repair Tools (Commercial, but with free limited checks or trials) Bobby (Watchfire) http://bobby.watchfire.com/bobby/html/en/ index.jsp Lift Online (Usablenet) http://www.usablenet.com/ Ask Alice (SSB Technology) http://askalice.ssbtechnologies.com:8080/ askalice/index.html Accverify (HiSoftware) http://www.hisoftware.com/access/sitetest.htm

Slide 29

Things to consider

Slide 30

Management Considerations How much will it cost? What can I do? Where do we need help? What is the developers role? What can I expect of off the shelf software? What about outsourced sites?

Slide 31

References Evaluating Websites for Accessibility http://www.w3.org/WAI/eval/Overview.html http://www.w3.org/WAI/eval/Overview.html The WAVE http://www.temple.edu/instituteondisabilities/piat/wave/ http://www.temple.edu/instituteondisabilities/piat/wave/ Tidy http://tidy.sourceforge.net/ http://tidy.sourceforge.net/ A-Prompt http://www.aprompt.ca/ http://www.aprompt.ca/