Print

Send

Share

Slideshow of this presentation on SlideShare

1.0 Review of Accessibility

Illustration of Web 1.0 and accessibility 1.0

International: a single source

• Define: web accessibility 1.0 (HTML + CSS + CMS with PDF and Flash).
• International Rules: a body ( W3C / WAI ) and standard ( WCAG 2.0 ).
• Rule emblematic put an alt to images.

France: a legal and methodological

• French GAAP: RGAA .
• National legislation: the requirement of accessibility of public websites (France: Article 47 of Law No 2005-102 (February 11, 2005) + Order of Application No. 2009 to 546 (14 May 2009) + Order of October 21, 2009 on the RGAA ).
• Environment methodological
  • Administrative Authority: The Interministerial Committee Disability "should establish a website and tools / guides.
  • Providers, training more than 200 Internet agencies with at least one person trained in the evaluation of accessibility guidelines.
  • Label Web 1.0 sites: Label AccessiWeb (association, not State).

Conclusion: Accessibility 1.0 is possible

• The Web Accessibility 1.0 (many public sector sites) is now possible.
• Why?
  • The rules are standardized.
  • Web 1.0 sites are characterized mainly by a centralized structure (control of Web pages hosted on the same server) and by a single author (editorial control). It is therefore possible to control their relative accessibility to standardized rules.
• This is a technical accessibility (applying rules on the code of a Web site upstream on the Web server) that does not require taking into account the downstream uses on the client.
• Accessibility 1.0 application providers trained to WCAG 2.0. These training and these providers exist.

(Third) Web in 2009: the diversity of users and uses

Illustration of the diversity of Internet

Audiences and purposes

• Persons with disabilities:
  • Blind People: Using a screen reader ( Jaws , NVDA ...) with Braille output and speech synthesis, linear reading of paragraphs or titles or a list of links, need a structured and semantic content; need Navigation homogeneous.
  • Visually impaired: use of a screen magnifier ( ZoomText ...) with speech, reading zoom; need good color contrasts, structure and navigation consistent and classical.
  • Deaf and hard of hearing: assessed using animations / Flash videos especially for people who sign, require video with synchronized captions and a translator RSA.
  • Persons with mobility impairments: use the Tab key keyboard and Web browser adapted, require consistent coding of information and a shortcut.
  • People with cognitive disabilities: difficulty to the disability to the websites, need simple and clear content and illustrations.
• Seniors: multiplicity of needs based on disability and ownership of computers (large print, contrasting colors, web links removed due to tremor, simple ergonomics, not an overload of information ...) the " Seniors and the Web "are currently studied by the W3C / WAI the group WAI-AGE which is Pierre Guillou ( ideos ).
• et Talks ). Mobilautes: simple websites can be used on small screens of mobile phones (compliance WCAG 2.0 and mobile Web Best Practices 1.0 ), others must be tailored applications (iPhone) phones themselves must be accessible ( iPhone accessibility , screen readers for mobile phones as Mobile Speak and Talks ).
• Digital television, multimedia terminals ... The means of consultation and customization of its consultation multiply.

Conclusion: The diversity of public consultation and uses a Web application multiple

• Diversity of public who browse the Web ...
• Diversity Tools Web Consulting (hardware and software) ...
• Different needs and uses Web Consulting ...
• Need to be able to customize the display of Web content to suit their needs consultation.
• In 2009, we must take into account the diversity of audiences and purposes. The technical accessibility is not enough.
• The issue of accessibility to the Internet moves (the flow of electronic data must be convertible at the position of the user).

(2 / 3) The Web in 2009: specialized services

• Specific services for persons with disabilities: AccessTextNetwork (United States service that allows disabled students to get courses and books in a format).
• Specific services for people with visual impairments: Robobraille (automatic conversion of documents into an accessible format and sent by email), WebVisum (Firefox plugin to solve CAPTCHA OCR).
• The URL for the deaf: News LSF , telephone relay center (USA), service eSourds (EDF) .
• ...

Conclusion: Web Accessibility is more than the accessibility of websites!

Web accessibility is also Web services tailored to the needs of people.

(3 / 3) The Web in 2009: Web 2.0

Illustration of Web 2.0

Understanding Web 2.0

• Definition: "Web 2.0 is the set of technologies and uses the World Wide Web that followed the initial shape of the web, especially the interfaces to allow users with little technical expertise to interact with both simple content and structure of the pages but between them, including creating the social Web. "[ Web 2.0 on Wikipedia ]
• « ), blog (l'incrémental Web), wiki et non CMS, divers lecteurs Web et pas seulement les navigateurs Web, coopération et pas contrôle, API , widgets, mashups, AJAX . Keywords Web 2.0: an attitude and not a technology, Internet contributor, rich user experience, participation and not publishing, syndication and RSS, interaction, web platform, sharing, continuous beta, optimization is not the domain name the data flow, data management, decentralization, tags and not categories (unlike folksonomy taxonomy), multiple Web sources ("long tail") and not just some reference sites, a system without an owner, standard open, collective intelligence and wisdom of crowds ("Wisdom of crowds"), blog (the incremental web), wiki and not CMS, various web players and not just Web browsers, cooperation and not control APIs, Widgets, Mashups, Ajax.
• Web 2.0 tools: blogs, wikis, social bookmarking, social networks ...
• Emblematic examples: Wikipedia , Google Reader , Google Maps , Netvibes , Flickr , Delicious , Facebook .
• Web 2.0 is evolving into "Real Time Web": Twitter , Google Wave ...

Conclusion: Web 2.0 is decentralizing the Web site owners web (Web 1.0) to the Internet

Web services are becoming more and more Web 2.0 services. In 2012, the information "real time web" covering 25% of the Web. These services and information are they and are they accessible?

Problems and solutions for accessibility of Web 2.0

Illustrations solutions Web accessibility 2.0

Problems for Web accessibility 2.0

• Dynamic Content: changing traffic patterns that can lead to destabilization.
• The Internet user technical support is not warned: update of data fields without reloading the page
• No editorial control: content updated by users and not by the site owner (compared to 1.0 websites).
• The entire web interface is interactive (web application) so that assistive recognize only the buttons and links as an object interaction (very low accessibility to the keyboard).
• Change interaction mechanisms (eg the data is saved as and as they are typed and not after submitting a form and can rearrange the positioning information via the mouse).
• Deconstruction of the concept of "website": each user can create their website from the same data flow thanks to widgets and mashups.
• Several ways to use a Web 2.0 service: Unlike Web 1.0 sites, the user must define its own use of a Web 2.0 service.
• CAPTCHA: all characters in the form of an image without alternative.
• Language not clear and explicit: @ replies, and DM on Twitter hastag example, or texting acronyms without explanation.

Solutions for Web Accessibility 2.0: no single solution

• Usability: If accessibility issues exist for Web 2.0, it should also be noted that many Web 2.0 services are simpler and more intuitive to use for many users (best design, which is very important for the use ).
• To open the code: the information must have a valid code and comply with accessibility rules of W3C / WAI ( WCAG 2.0 ) for Web applications, the rules must be applied WAI-ARIA (accessibility guidelines set by W3C / WAI to make accessible Web Services using AJAX), there are also AxsJAX (ARIA script library defined by Google and to make available at the server or a Web service client using AJAX).
• Relying on a community: Accessibility Project Social (social network allowing real-time correction of the accessibility of any Web page by authorized users) Scripting Enabled (community of developers creating accessible alternatives to existing Web 2.0 services as YouTube, Flickr and SlideShare).
• Develop alternative Web services: Web 2.0 services give control of its flow of information to the user (eg RSS feeds of blogs that allow surfers to read the blog posts not on the website transmitter but in the reader's choice) and it is then possible to as many suitable reader developer of information flows that are needed for consultation ( access Twitter , accessible interface to YouTube , Easy YouTube , Flickr Easy , Easy SlideShare ).
• Deploy solutions for automating the accessibility of existing services: Automatic captions in YouTube .
• Customization and error compensation of existing Web services accessible at the client: GreaseMonkey .

Conclusion: Web 2.0 is an opportunity to request access ... but to structure a novel method (methods, training, customized services, social networks for access, etc..)

• The accessibility of Web 2.0 requires a greater technical competence and consideration of uses.
• The only knowledge of HTML and WCAG 2.0 is not sufficient (necessary but not sufficient).
• He must study and focus its development on the Web 2.0 user interactions.
• It is (sometimes) to develop alternatives or give the user the tools to change the behavior of a Web service directly into its client.
• This is therefore a comparison with 2.0 Accessibility Accessibility 1.0 Web sites.

Summary: accessibility includes accessibility 2.0 1.0

• Accessibility 1.0 still necessary because there are still many Web 1.0 sites. It is becoming well known, and training courses and providers exist.
• But the Web today is also:
  • a wide variety of audiences specific needs,
  • Web services not only specialized sites,
  • and flow of information Web 2.0 rather than static sites.
• New methods of accessibility and an approach that is more technical and taking into account the uses are necessary: it is the accessibility 2.0!
• The system of training methodologies and providers of accessibility remains to develop 2.0.