[bcab] Fw: The Practicalities Of Accessible, Commercial Web Design

WebProNews.com
Thursday, September 28, 2006

The Practicalities Of Accessible, Commercial Web Design

By Leonie Watson, Expert Author

I have read with interest recent articles containing hints and tips for cutting 
corners when it 
comes to making your site accessible to all.

However, many of these suggestions do not accommodate the practicalities of 
commercial web design; 
where cut corners often result in limited accessibility. With this in mind I 
have attempted to 
unravel some of these hints/tips/advice/fallacies below.

I think that it's pretty well-established now that any agency promising 
complete site 'DDA 
compliance' is to be avoided. PAS 78, the guide to good practice in 
commissioning accessible 
websites, points out that legal compliance with DDA is a nonsense, citing a 
lack of case law as the 
reason. PAS 78 is now freely available and I would urge all site commissioners 
and web developers to 
read it.

Building a website that follows guidelines and standards is simple, providing 
of course that the 
site is simple. In situations where technology and content do not permit such 
simplicity, for 
example, a corporate website running a multi-million pound Content Management 
System (CMS), 
significant expertise is required to bring it into line with acceptable levels 
of accessibility. 
There are few companies in the world that attempt this kind of technical 
achievement and even fewer 
who have actually accomplished it. This is a reality check: most corporate 
websites are deeply 
entrenched in such technologies which cannot be discarded or set aside on a 
whim.

I read a recent recommendation that suggested getting a visually impaired 
person to come in to 'test 
drive the site'. This concerns me greatly. Accessible design is a far wider 
issue than catering for 
a single disability.

As a visually impaired person myself, I am well aware of the difficulties we 
face, but 
unquestionably the needs of hearing, cognitive and physically impaired people 
should not be 
dismissed as a consequence.

What further concerns me is the ease with which amateur user-testing can be 
invalidated. Without 
taking into account factors of experience, technical ability and environment, 
the results of amateur 
user testing are notoriously inaccurate and misguiding. Especially at a time 
when many testing 
facilities still believe that a two way mirror is an acceptable method of 
hiding viewers from 
testing participants. Amateur testing is simply foolhardy and a waste of time 
and money.

Finally, I come onto the use of automated tools as a means of checking how 
accessible your site is. 
Some are free to use. Excellent; isn't it? Well let's think about this: of the 
65 checkpoints within 
Web Content Accessibility Guide 1.0 (WCAG 1.0), only 5 can actually be checked 
fully using an 
automated tool such as WebXact, for example, and only 8 more can be partially 
checked. That means 
that barely 8% of WCAG 1.0 checkpoints can be tested by an automated tool with 
complete accuracy.

As an indicator of underlying problems automated testing can be a useful tool. 
But only as part of a 
range of applications and methodologies that contribute towards accessible web 
design. They should 
not however be relied upon as part of a testing strategy and I would hesitate 
to recommend that 
anyone who does not understand how the guidelines work relies on it at all.

Good designers should, and hopefully do, build accessibility in as standard at 
no extra cost. 
However maintaining accessibility levels post development cannot be sustained 
without investment. 
Accessibility can be upheld by either training an in-house team or bringing in 
outside expertise for 
ongoing quality assurance, although both require financial investment, either 
directly or 
indirectly. Achieving accessibility is one thing, keeping it is quite another.

If you are serious about making your website accessible to all; you need to get 
an accredited 
designer or agency on board. There are many out there, so do shop around. Once 
you have a designer 
or agency in your sights see if you can speak to some of its existing clients. 
This will enable you 
to gain a first hand appreciation of how they do business. Independent 
affirmation of web 
accessibility can be difficult to come by, particularly if accessible design is 
not your field of 
expertise.

In short, DDA compliance is nonsense, watch for agencies that claim they can 
deliver it. 
Accessibility should be built in as standard, but thought needs to be given to 
sustaining it. User 
testing is extremely useful, but only if it's conducted properly and the 
results interpreted 
accurately. Automated tools are unreliable and largely unhelpful, so be sure 
that you understand the 
results you're looking at, and read PAS 78 to get an understanding of 
accessible web design.

(SOURCE URL)

http://www.webpronews.com/expertarticles/expertarticles/wpn-62-20060928ThePracticalitiesofAccessibleCommercialWebDesign.html



***  BCAB List administration ***

If you wish to unsubscribe, set vacation,, request a digest or carry out 
routine maintenance on your subscription to the list then go to:
http://www.bcab.org.uk/mailing-list.html

If you wish to discuss the administration of the list then contact:
secretary@xxxxxxxxxxx

Other related posts: