Accessibility in Web Design - Evaluating Current Practices and Technologies (original) (raw)

2024, Accessibility in Web Design - Evaluating Current Practices and Technologies

Abstract

This dissertation examines the current state of web accessibility, focusing on the evaluation of existing practices and technologies in meeting the needs of all users, including those with disabilities. Despite significant advancements in web technologies, many websites still fall short of providing truly inclusive experiences. This study aims to bridge the gap between current accessibility implementations and the actual requirements of users with diverse abilities. The research employs a mixed-methods approach, combining automated accessibility testing tools, manual expert evaluations, and user testing with individuals with disabilities. A comprehensive analysis of various websites across different industries is conducted, using evaluation criteria based on the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1. Key findings reveal discrepancies between automated and manual testing results, highlighting the limitations of purely technological solutions. The study also identifies industry-specific trends in accessibility implementation and explores the effectiveness of various assistive technologies, including screen readers, alternative input devices, and emerging AI-powered tools. Based on these findings, the dissertation provides recommendations for best practices in accessible web design, strategies for improving existing websites, and suggestions for enhancing accessibility standards and guidelines. Additionally, it proposes new approaches and technologies to address identified gaps in current practices. This research contributes to the field of web accessibility by offering a comprehensive evaluation of current practices and technologies, while also providing practical insights for web designers, developers, and policymakers to create more inclusive digital experiences.

Loading...

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

References (80)

  1. Al-Mouh, N. and Al-Khalifa, H. (2016). Enhancing web accessibility by implementing context aware proxy. International Journal of Web Information Systems, 12(2), 201- 214. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijwis-11-2015-0037
  2. Borchard, L., Biondo, M., Kutay, S., Morck, D., & Weiss, A. (2015). Making journals accessible front &back: examining open journal systems at csu northridge. Oclc Systems & Services, 31(1), 35-50. https://doi.org/10.1108/oclc-02-2014-0013
  3. Brobst, J. (2011). Access denied: improving federal policy on web accessibility. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 48(1), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1002/meet.2011.14504801307
  4. Comeaux, D. and Schmetzke, A. (2013). Accessibility of academic library web sites in north america. Library Hi Tech, 31(1), 8-33. https://doi.org/10.1108/07378831311303903
  5. Jaeger, P. (2008). User-centered policy evaluations of section 508 of the rehabilitation act. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 19(1), 24-33. https://doi.org/10.1177/1044207308315274
  6. Kuber, R., Yu, W., & O'Modhrain, M. (2010). Tactile web browsing for blind users., 75-84. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15841-4\_9
  7. Lunn, D., Harper, S., & Bechhofer, S. (2011). Identifying behavioral strategies of visually impaired users to improve access to web content. Acm Transactions on Accessible Computing, 3(4), 1-35. https://doi.org/10.1145/1952388.1952390
  8. Murphy, E., Kuber, R., McAllister, G., Strain, P., & Yu, W. (2007). An empirical investigation into the difficulties experienced by visually impaired internet users. Universal Access in the Information Society, 7(1-2), 79-91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-007-0098-4
  9. Providenti, M. and Zai, R. (2007). Web accessibility at academic libraries: standards, legislation, and enforcement. Library Hi Tech, 25(4), 494-508. https://doi.org/10.1108/07378830710840455
  10. Wells, J. and Barron, A. (2006). School web sites: are they accessible to all?. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(3), 23-30. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264340602100303
  11. "Accessibility of academic library web sites in North America" Library hi tech (2013) doi:10.1108/07378831311303903
  12. "Web accessibility at academic libraries: standards, legislation, and enforcement" Library hi tech (2007) doi:10.1108/07378830710840455
  13. "Access denied: Improving federal policy on Web accessibility" Proceedings of the american society for information science and technology (2011) doi:10.1002/meet.2011.14504801307
  14. "User-Centered Policy Evaluations of Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act" Journal of disability policy studies (2008) doi:10.1177/1044207308315274
  15. "Enhancing web accessibility by implementing context aware proxy" International journal of web information systems (2016) doi:10.1108/ijwis-11-2015-0037
  16. "An empirical investigation into the difficulties experienced by visually impaired Internet users" Universal access in the information society (2007) doi:10.1007/s10209-007-0098-4
  17. "Identifying Behavioral Strategies of Visually Impaired Users to Improve Access to Web Content" ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing (2011) doi:10.1145/1952388.1952390
  18. "Making journals accessible front and back: examining open journal systems at CSU Northridge" OCLC Systems & Services (2015) doi:10.1108/oclc-02-2014-0013
  19. "Tactile Web Browsing for Blind Users" (2010) doi:10.1007/978-3-642-15841-4_9
  20. "School Web Sites: Are They Accessible to All?" Journal of Special Education Technology (2006) doi:10.1177/016264340602100303
  21. WebAIM. (2021). Screen Reader User Survey 9 Results. https://webaim.org/projects/screenreadersurvey9/
  22. Fazzi, M., et al. (2023). "Evaluating the Effectiveness of Modern Screen Readers in Complex Web Environments." Journal of Web Accessibility, 15(2), 78-95.
  23. Smith, J., et al. (2022). "Comparative Analysis of Alternative Input Methods for Web Navigation Tasks." Proceedings of the 24th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility, 112-124.
  24. Johnson, A., et al. (2024). "The Role of Browser Extensions in Enhancing Web Accessibility: A User Survey." International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 40(3), 301-315.
  25. Zhang, L., et al. (2023). "Advancements in AI-Generated Alt Text: A Comprehensive Evaluation." Proceedings of the 25th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility, 45-57.
  26. WebAIM. (2021). The WebAIM Million -An accessibility analysis of the top 1,000,000 home pages. https://webaim.org/projects/million/
  27. Acosta-Vargas, P., Luján-Mora, S., & Salvador-Ullauri, L. (2021). "Evaluation of the web accessibility of higher-education websites." 2021 International Conference on Information Systems and Software Technologies (ICI2ST), 1-6.
  28. Yuhao, W., Zhi-Hao, C., & Qing, L. (2022). "A Comparative Study of Web Accessibility on Mobile and Desktop Platforms." Journal of Web Engineering, 21(3), 339-358.
  29. Thompson, S., Ramirez, A., & Johnson, K. (2023). "User Experiences in Web Accessibility: A Qualitative Study of Barriers and Facilitators." International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 39(5), 623-641.
  30. Johnson, M., Lee, S., & Patel, R. (2024). "Automated vs. Manual Web Accessibility Testing: A Comparative Analysis." Proceedings of the 26th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility, 87-99.
  31. Li, X., Gonzalez, A., & Smith, J. (2023). "Inclusive Design Practices in Web Development: A Survey of Current Industry Trends." Web Engineering: 23rd International Conference, ICWE 2023, 256-270.
  32. Martinez, C., Thompson, D., & Lee, J. (2024). "Cognitive Accessibility on the Web: Current Status and Future Directions." Cognitive Systems Research, 70, 142-157.
  33. Zhang, L., Brown, A., & Davis, M. (2023). "Accessibility of Web Content Management Systems: Implications for Content Creators with Disabilities." Journal of Accessibility and Design for All, 13(1), 31-50.
  34. WebAIM. (2021). The WebAIM Million -An accessibility analysis of the top 1,000,000 home pages. https://webaim.org/projects/million/
  35. Acosta-Vargas, P., Luján-Mora, S., & Salvador-Ullauri, L. (2021). "Evaluation of the web accessibility of higher-education websites." 2021 International Conference on Information Systems and Software Technologies (ICI2ST), 1-6.
  36. Thompson, S., Ramirez, A., & Johnson, K. (2023). "User Experiences in Web Accessibility: A Qualitative Study of Barriers and Facilitators." International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 39(5), 623-641.
  37. Johnson, M., Lee, S., & Patel, R. (2024). "Automated vs. Manual Web Accessibility Testing: A Comparative Analysis." Proceedings of the 26th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility, 87-99.
  38. Gleason, C., Pavel, A., McClelland, E., & Dasgupta, T. (2023). "AI-Generated Image Descriptions: A Leap Forward in Web Accessibility." ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing, 16(2), 1-28.
  39. Holmes, K. (2018). Mismatch: How Inclusion Shapes Design. MIT Press.
  40. W3C. (2018). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1. https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/
  41. WebAIM. (2021). Semantic Structure: Regions, Headings, and Lists. https://webaim.org/techniques/semanticstructure/
  42. W3C. (2016). Understanding Success Criterion 2.1.1: Keyboard. https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/Understanding/keyboard.html
  43. WebAIM. (2021). Alternative Text. https://webaim.org/techniques/alttext/
  44. W3C. (2016). Understanding Success Criterion 1.4.3: Contrast (Minimum). https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/Understanding/contrast-minimum.html
  45. WebAIM. (2021). Creating Accessible Forms. https://webaim.org/techniques/forms/
  46. W3C. (2016). Understanding Guideline 1.2: Time-based Media. https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/Understanding/time-based-media.html
  47. Marcotte, E. (2011). Responsive Web Design. A Book Apart.
  48. U.S. General Services Administration. (2021). Accessibility for Teams. https://accessibility.digital.gov/
  49. Horton, S., & Quesenbery, W. (2014). A Web for Everyone: Designing Accessible User Experiences. Rosenfeld Media.
  50. WebAIM. (2021). "Quick Fixes" for Web Accessibility. https://webaim.org/blog/quick-fixes/
  51. Champeon, S. (2003). Progressive Enhancement and the Future of Web Design. http://www.hesketh.com/publications/progressive\_enhancement\_and\_the\_future\_ of_web_design.html
  52. Featherstone, D. (2014). Accessibility Training for Web Content Authors. https://www.microassist.com/digital-accessibility/accessibility-training-for-web- content-authors/
  53. Sheen, B., & Lucchini, E. (2017). Developing Accessibility Guidelines for a Company. https://www.smashingmagazine.com/2017/11/developing-accessibility- guidelines-for-a-company/
  54. Groves, K. (2019). Integrate Accessibility into Your Development Process. https://www.deque.com/blog/shift-left-accessibility-best-practices/
  55. W3C. (2019). Making Content Usable for People with Cognitive and Learning Disabilities. https://www.w3.org/TR/coga-usable/
  56. W3C. (2021). XR Accessibility User Requirements. https://www.w3.org/TR/xaur/
  57. W3C. (2015). Mobile Accessibility: How WCAG 2.0 and Other W3C/WAI Guidelines Apply to Mobile. https://www.w3.org/TR/mobile-accessibility-mapping/
  58. Accessible University. (2020). Web Accessibility Guidelines Organizing Techniques. http://accessibleuniversity.com/accessibility-guidelines/
  59. Bai, X., et al. (2019). "Evaluating and Measuring Web Accessibility." ACM Computing Surveys, 52(3), 1-38.
  60. Bigham, J. P., et al. (2021). "AI-Powered Accessibility: Current and Future Trends." ACM SIGACCESS Accessibility and Computing, (130), 3-18.
  61. Garaventa, B. (2018). "Proposal for Standardized Personalized Web Accessibility." Proceedings of the 15th Web for All Conference, 1-4.
  62. Guo, P. J., et al. (2021). "Automatic Generation of Audio Descriptions for Multimedia Content." Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1-12.
  63. Moreno, L., et al. (2020). "Toward an Equal Opportunity Web: Applications, Standards, and Tools that Increase Accessibility." Computer, 53(12), 18-29.
  64. Aizpurua, A., et al. (2020). "Validating the Effectiveness of EvalAccess Using Real Users." Proceedings of the 17th International Web for All Conference, 1-10.
  65. Abou-Zahra, S., et al. (2018). "Accessibility APIs: A Key to Web Accessibility." Proceedings of the Internet of Accessible Things, 1-10.
  66. Mori, K., & Miwa, H. (2020). "Blockchain Technology for Enhancing Web Accessibility." 2020 IEEE International Conference on Blockchain (Blockchain), 472- 477.
  67. WebAIM. (2023). The WebAIM Million -An annual accessibility analysis of the top 1,000,000 home pages. https://webaim.org/projects/million/
  68. Vu, M., & Launey, K. (2023). Number of Federal Website Accessibility Lawsuits Nearly Doubled in 2022. Seyfarth Shaw LLP. https://www.adatitleiii.com/2023/02/number-of-federal-website-accessibility- lawsuits-nearly-doubled-in-2022/
  69. World Health Organization. (2022). Disability and health fact sheet. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/disability-and-health
  70. W3C Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI). (2023). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) Overview. https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards- guidelines/wcag/
  71. Feingold, L. (2022). Digital Accessibility Legal Update for 2022. Lainey Feingold Law Office. https://www.lflegal.com/2022/12/2022-legal-update/
  72. 2.1, consists of four principles: Perceivable, Operable, Understandable, and Robust (POUR).
  73. Semantic HTML: The use of HTML markup to reinforce the meaning of the information in webpages rather than merely to define its presentation or look. Proper use of semantic HTML is crucial for accessibility as it provides context and structure for assistive technologies.
  74. Accessibility Tree: A tree of accessible objects that represents the structure of the user interface (UI). Each node in the accessibility tree represents an element in the UI as exposed to assistive technologies, such as screen readers.
  75. Audio Description: Narration added to the soundtrack of a video to describe important visual details that cannot be understood from the main soundtrack alone. It's crucial for making video content accessible to users with visual impairments.
  76. Braille Display: A device that allows people who are blind or deafblind to read text output in braille characters. It connects to computers and smartphones, translating on-screen text into braille in real-time.
  77. Closed Captions: Text versions of the spoken word presented within multimedia. Unlike open captions, closed captions can be turned on or off by the viewer. They benefit deaf and hard-of-hearing users, as well as those watching video in noisy environments or learning a new language.
  78. Document Object Model (DOM): A programming interface for HTML and XML documents. It represents the structure of a document and allows programs and scripts to dynamically access and update the content, structure, and style of documents. The DOM is crucial for creating interactive web applications and plays a significant role in web accessibility.
  79. Descriptive Link Text: Link text that clearly indicates the destination or purpose of the link when read out of context. For example, "Read more about accessibility" is more descriptive than just "Click here." 18. Focus Management: The practice of programmatically setting focus in a web application to guide users through interactive processes, especially after dynamic content changes. Proper focus management is crucial for keyboard accessibility and for users of screen readers. document.querySelectorAll('.accordion-trigger').forEach((trigger) => { trigger.addEventListener('click', (e) => { const isExpanded = trigger.getAttribute('aria-expanded') === 'true'; trigger.setAttribute('aria-expanded', !isExpanded);
  80. const panel = document.getElementById(trigger.getAttribute('aria-controls')); panel.hidden = isExpanded;