Commentary
Web Accessibility is Up to All of Us
By William Loughborough
The World Wide Web is an essential resource for acquiring
and providing information, enabling social interaction, enhancing education,
assisting recreation, simplifying commerce, furthering governmental
transactions, demystifying health care materials, complying with the United
Nation's human rights proclamation and much, much more.
The Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) of the World Wide
Web Consortium (W3C) has made it its business to make that resource accessible
and able to provide equal access and opportunity to people of all abilities.
To that end, the WAI of the W3C has a Web Content
Accessibility Guidelines Working Group that spent 10 years upgrading the
original set of guidelines (WCAG 1) to keep pace with the rapid development of
new technologies. The new version is called Web 2.0, or WCAG 2.0.
The good news is that those of us who aren't very geeky or
nerdy need not pay attention to the details of this specification. We just have
to be able to tell whether the materials we encounter on the Web are accessible
(particularly if we have problems with using a monitor or mouse) and report any
difficulties in using the Web.
By focusing on the user's needs, the standard that is now
“official” assures that any designer who makes materials for the
World Wide Web has a set of guidelines and associated examples enabling
production of significantly more accessible Web content for everyone. WCAG 2.0
has established four principles, known by the acronym POUR: perceivable,
operable, understandable and robust.
The first principle means that information must be
presented to users in ways they can perceive. A site should be perceivable to
everyone, even if users require assistive technologies such as screen readers
or magnifiers to actually sense the content, either as text or through spoken
text (or Braille).
If the content is aural, there must be various kinds of
controls enabling the deaf or hard of hearing to comprehend the content of the
sound and be able to scroll around while still getting a usable version of what
“normal users” expect. Just as any images must have
“alt-text” to replace them, so sounds must have visible versions of
their content (or intent if not verbal) and videos should have “video
description” so that actions onscreen are conveyed through spoken
descriptions.
The second principle, operable, means that all functions
should be available from a keyboard. Operable means that those who cannot
routinely use a mouse have a way to interact with such things as forms, via the
keyboard, or with sip- or puff-actuated switches or whatever assistive
technology they need to deal with the Web and computers in general.
The next principle states that text content should be
readable and understandable.
Understandable is a bit more involved because users’
disabilities may include not only those of a physical nature but of a cognitive
one as well. The material needs to be as simple as is suitable for the intended
purpose of the material. Someone doing a treatise on esoteric nuclear physics
or mathematics cannot be expected to have to write it so that I can understand
it, but if the site is to enable users to acquire information about SSDI
benefits, for example, then it should be clear what it is trying to convey. It
also must be clear how to move about on the Web site. This is usually referred
to as “navigation” and might involve the use of a “site
map.”
The fourth principle, robust, states that a Web site
designer should assure compatibility with users’ assistive technology.
Robust may be the most technical of the principles because
it deals with the use of various current and evolving technologies. It all
hinges on the notion of “interoperability” as a fundamental
characteristic of accessible Web content. In short, if one’s access system
doesn't work like it's supposed to, it is not robust.
The technologists have done their part. Now the rest is up
to us.
What is our part in making the Web accessible? We are the
monitors, judges and whistle-blowers whose job it is to actively advocate for
our needs to use the same Web that so-called “normal” people do. When
we encounter a problem with a Web site, particularly if it's a governmental
(.gov) or educational (.edu) presence on the Web, it is up to us to do what's
necessary to assure compliance with the principles.
Schools and governments (local, state and federal) are
required to conform to the guidelines. It's the law.
What can we do when we encounter a site that doesn't
comply? If it's a government site, it probably adheres to the guideline
requirements that call for it to clearly identify where to register a complaint
about accessibility.
If they ignore you, ramp it up – even if you have to
notify your representative of the site’s failure to respond. When such
efforts fail (which they often do), send me a report, and I will take action,
starting with the same things you've tried but escalating to proactive legal
efforts. The laws concerning accessibility are just as enforceable as those
about exposure to tobacco or asbestos. There will be legal services to help in
assuring that all of us can use the Web to its full potential.
In that vein is a recent case, the National Federation of
the Blind vs. Target stores. Although it was settled out of court for millions
of dollars (therefore not becoming “case law”), it has put the fear
of huge lost revenue into many corporate entities that are now scurrying to
attain accessibility and avoid such disastrous outcomes.
The nearly $10 million Target spent on attorneys would
have been avoided had it spent a few tens of thousands of dollars on designing
within the required specifications. “Programmers Now” is way cheaper
than “Lawyers Later.”
If you include accessibility from the start rather than
trying to “bolt it on” after doing the other chores of building a
site, you will reap many benefits. There are documents at the WAI site making
the business case for accessible design.
It's up to us to insist on an accessible Web, starting
right now. The tools for this are already in the hands of any competent
professional Web designer, and the recourses are now well established in
regulations. Dozens of countries have laws requiring compliance with WCAG, and
there is even a U.N. decree concerning it.
If you're familiar with coding html/css/javascript, go to
http://www.w3.org/wai and look at the
dozens of applicable documents, or get a good book such as “Universal
Design for Web Applications” by Wendy Chisholm and Matt May, two of the
many technologists responsible for the standard.
If, on the other hand the preceding paragraph makes little
sense to you, then you are the really important part of enforcing accessibility
rules. Just remember the acronym POUR represents the principles on which the
guidelines are based, and whenever you have trouble with a site, see if it
violates one of those basic principles.
Other technical links include
http://www.w3.org/wai,
http://www.w3.org/WAI/bcase
and http://www.w3.org/WAI/participation.html.
William Loughborough is a frequent contributor to
Independence Today. He has been involved in the Web Accessibility
Initiative since its inception and has 50 years' experience in providing
devices for blind orientation. |
