WCAG-CAC_csun12

Harmonizing WCAG Conformity Assessment Method

Session WEB-036CSUN 2012


Authors

• Dominique Burger : BrailleNet association, presidentContact : [email protected]

• Jean-Pierre Villain : Qelios company, technical directorContact : [email protected]

• Denis Boulay (speaker) : BrailleNet association, AccessiWeb director

Contact : [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]




We are from here


Content of the session

• Presentation of the WCAG CAC (Conformity Assessment Cohenrence) project

• Description of a list’s management tool

• Demonstration of the tool prototype


WCAG 2.0 is the universal reference for Web Accessibility

• Europe : Communication "Towards an accessible information society" (1.12.2008)

• France : Law on the rights of people with disabilities – Article 47 : accessibility of public online services (11.02.2005)Creation of an e-accessibility checklist (RGAA) based on WCAG 2.0 (23.10.2009)

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/einclusion/policy/accessibility/com_2008/index_en.htm

http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000000809647&dateTexte=


Demand for independent conformity assessment

Third Party Certification

• Quality Marks :• Assessment methods• Checklist• Single tests

• Certification Process


Several schemes have emerged

• Belgium• France• Italy• Spain• UK

All refering to WCAG2.0 !It works locally in different countries


Practical questions

• Do they really cover 100% WCAG2.0 ?• Do they provide additional information ?• What correspondences between them ?• Do they tell the same story about Web sites ?• Is it possible to certify in one country using a scheme

developed in another ?


WCAG Conformity Assessment Coherence - Phase 1

• Sample pages (32) covering all WCAG AA• Evaluation by experts according their checklists• Comparison of the results• Descriptive Questionnaire to learn more about

each checklist and assessment methods


WCAG Conformity Assessment Coherence - Phase 2

Development of a tool :

• Model of Data• Proof of concept


The project has two main objectives

Analyse Use

1. Provide analysis tools to assure the relation between :

1. a checklist to WCAG2. a checklist to another

checklist3. several checklists to WCAG4. several checklists to one

checklist

1. Provide tools for the expert in order to :

1. adapt a checklist to a web project

2. use several checklists for a same web project

3. Facilitate maintenance and update of checklists

WCAG CAC project

UWEM (Unified Web Evaluation Methodology) Solution

Objective : provide a common recognition scheme based on multiple checklists

Common checklist

Lowest common denominator

Rarely used

Not adapted to checklists, practices and tools used locally

Allow to :

1. Choose a working checklist (eg. AW)2. Choose targeted checklists

Obtain a version of your working checklist adapted to the constraints and requirements of all targeted checklists


The expert, his working checklist and a web project

Problem Solution

Objective : work only on what is useful

A checklist covers all possible cases

Increase of the expert work

A lot of « noise » due to the unnecessary criteria presence in the

context of the project

Allow to :1. Adapt a checklist :

1. Only useful elements2. add personalized criteria, key-

words, modify the structure

Obtain a version of its working checklist really adapted to the targeted projectMore complexity in the results analysis


ProblemChecklists have different structures


Checklists Nb of elements Description Notes

WCAG 2.0 4 Principle Guideline Success criterion Techniques

AccessiWeb 2.1 4 Thematic Criterion Test Conditions

AnySurfer 2 Bloc Guideline

Abilitynet 1 Success criterion

Technosite/MEWA 1 Criterion

UWEM 2 4 Principle Guideline Success criterion Techniques

Problem


Checklists Nb of elements Description Notes

WCAG 2.0 4 Principle Guideline Success criterion Techniques

AccessiWeb 2.1 4 Thematic Criterion Test Conditions

AnySurfer 2 Bloc Guideline

Abilitynet 1 Success criterion

Technosite/MEWA 1 Criterion

UWEM 2 4 Principle Guideline Success criterion Techniques

The relationship to WCAG is established via a measuring level belonging to each checklist

Resulting data model


WCAG CAC

Physical Data View


The constraint of the Data Model

A unique measuring level

Case of AnySufer

Original structure :- Bloc

- Guideline (mesuring level) - Critère (mesuring level)

"Rectifying" structure- Bloc

- Guideline (mesuring level)

A one-to-one relationship with WCAG

A measuring level is defined by :

1. A main success criterion2. One or several additional

success criteria

The relationship with WCAG is defined by the main success criterion


Model of correspondence request

Requests

1. Fusion (Request « Via ») : to mix the checklists

2. Comparison (Request « Vs »)1. Completion : add informations2. Difference : remove information


Example for request « Via »

Common structure

N

N1

N2

N3

N4

AW 2.1

Via WCAG

Resulting structure

N

N1

N2

N3

N4

N

N1

N2

WCAG

AW 2


Example of a complex request

Common structure

N

N1

N2

N3

N4

AW 2.1

+ RGAA

+ AnySurfer

Resulting structure

AW 2.1

RGAA

AnySurfer

AW 2.1

N

N1

N2

N 3

N 4

N2

N2

The request displays AccessiWeb 2.1 checklist with, for each test, all RGAA and Anysurfer checklist’s tests to add : all those who have no correspondence with AccessiWeb 2.1 checklist


Prototype1. Validate the data model 2. Elaborate the requests engine3. Testing all the requests

Phase 1 : simple case

Checklist

WCAG

Phase 2 : more complex cases

Checklist

Checklist

ChecklistChecklistChecklistChecklist

WCAGCAC



Online Demo


Thank you

Questions ?

Date post:	25-Jun-2015
Category:	Design
Upload:	denisboulay
View:	2,333 times
Download:	0 times

WCAG-CAC_csun12

Design