Web Accessibility 3.0: Learning From The Past, Planning For The Future - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


PPT – Web Accessibility 3.0: Learning From The Past, Planning For The Future PowerPoint presentation | free to view - id: 2256b0-ZDc1Z


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation

Web Accessibility 3.0: Learning From The Past, Planning For The Future


http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/web-focus/events/conferences/addw08 ... Kelly, Phipps & Swift developed. a blended approach to. e-learning accessibility. This approach: ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:53
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 28
Provided by: brian89


Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Web Accessibility 3.0: Learning From The Past, Planning For The Future

Web Accessibility 3.0 Learning From The Past,
Planning For The Future
  • Brian Kelly
  • University of Bath
  • Bath, UK
  • Email
  • b.kelly_at_ukoln.ac.uk
  • Blog
  • http//ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/

Acceptable Use Policy Recording/broadcasting of
this talk, taking photographs, discussing the
content using email, instant messaging, blogs,
etc. is permitted providing distractions to
others is minimised.
Co-author Liddy Nevile
Resources bookmarked using addw08' tag
UKOLN is supported by
This work is licensed under a Attribution-NonComme
rcial-ShareAlike 2.0 licence (but note caveat)
Scenario Planning
  • Let us critique the first two scenarios in order
    to explore their limitations (their benefits have
    been well documented) and see if a third scenario
    might address such limitations

WAI Approach
WAIs Approach
  • WAI model relies on conformant Web sites,
    conformant authoring tools, conformant user
  • and conformant users!
  • A common complaint of standardistas the user
    needs to take responsibility
  • There is value in this argument but there are
    practical shortcomings
  • And user technophobia/laziness/lethargy is only
    one obstacle
  • How many users know they are disabled?

Also note importance of evidence-based research.
Various UK accessibility studies seem to find
that lack of evidence of accessibility of Web
sites for PWDs and conformance with WCAG
WCAG In Context
WAIs Scenario
  • WCAG 2.0 states that Web resources must be
  • Perceivable Operable
  • Understandable Robust
  • But this should apply after weve decided what
    our purposes our, rather than constraining what
    we can or cant do
  • Super Cally Go Ballistic, Celtic Are
    Atrocious Not universally understandable, now
    universally accessible, culturally-specific but
  • Adobe Flash, MS Word, Are these formats
    essential to your corporate infrastructure and
  • Web 2.0, Ajax, Blog, Wikis, UGC, Do these
    provide useful services to your users?

Legislation take reasonable measure .. Is
bankrupting your company reasonable? Is failing
to satisfy your user community reasonable? Is
dumbing down the English language reasonable?
Holistic Approach
Holistic Scenario
  • Kelly, Phipps Swift developed a blended
    approach to e-learning accessibility
  • This approach
  • Focusses on the needs of the learner
  • Requires accessible learning outcomes, not
    necessarily e-learning resources

Follow-up work awarded prize for Best Research
Paper at ALT-C 2005 E-learning conference
Universal Accessibility?
Holistic Scenario
Normal Cancer
Man against snow, Austrian Tirol 1974, reproduced
with permission of the photographer Professor
Paul Hill

The Great Masturbator by Salvador Dali (1929)
Articulating the Approach
Holistic Scenario
  • The "Tangram Metaphor (Sloan et al, W4A 2006)
    developed to avoid checklist / automated
  • W3C model has limitations
  • Jigsaw model implies single solution
  • Tangram model seeks to avoid such problems
  • This approach
  • Encourages developers to think about a diversity
    of solutions
  • Focus on 'pleasure' it provides to user

Accessibility 2.0
Holistic Scenario
  • Need to build on WAIs successes, whilst
    articulating a more sophisticated approach.
    Accessibility 2.0
  • User-focussed Its about satisfying users needs
  • Rich set of stakeholders More than the author
    and the user
  • Always beta Accessibility is hard, so were
    continually learning
  • Flexibility Theres not a single solution
  • Diversity Theres also diversity in societys
    views on accessibility (e.g. widening
    participation, not universal accessibility)
  • Blended solutions Focus on accessibility and
    not just Web accessibility

But do scenarios 1 and 2 scale to the size,
complexity and diversity of todays Web?
(No Transcript)
The Web is Agreement
Where Are We In This View?
  • WCAGATAGUAAGuniversal accessibility
  • Motherhood and apple pie?
  • Demonstrably flawed after 10 years e.g. Lilley
    99.99999 of the Web was invalid HTML. W3C
    pretended that didnt exist.
  • So 99.9999 of Web isnt WACG AA conformant!
  • WCAGother guidelinesuser focusblended
    accessibility widening participation
  • Not yet proven wrong, but ignores scale of Web

The Holistic Hamlet
The Pixel of Perfection
  • Kevin Kelly

Accessibility 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0
Accessibility 3.0 Scenario
  • Accessibility 1.0
  • Handcrafted resources made accessible
  • Accessibility 2.0
  • Institutional approaches to accessibility
  • Accessibility 3.0
  • Global approaches to accessibility

A Fresh Look At Accessibility
Accessibility 3.0 Scenario
  • We acknowledge that
  • Not everything on the Web will ever be accessible
  • Accessibility may not cross cultural, linguistic,
    national and discipline boundaries
  • An individual does not need a universally
    accessible resource rather s/he wants a resource
    which is accessible to them
  • Different communities may have different needs
  • Same person may have different needs at different
    times and places
  • Lets not talk about the accessibility of a
  • We find the term inclusive more useful than
    accessible to people with disabilities

Getting There
Accessibility 3.0 Scenario
  • Web 1.0
  • Focus on resources published by institutions
  • Focus on management of resources (CMSs)
  • Web 2.0
  • Focus on users and user-generated content
  • Focus on reuse of resources (syndication,
    embedding, )
  • Focus on user comments and discussions
  • Trust and openness
  • Accessibility 1.0
  • Focus on accessibility of published resources
  • Focus on software to support publication
  • Accessibility 2.0
  • Focus on accessibility of use of content rather
    than content
  • Blended accessibility cf potential of social
    networks to facilitate discussions
  • Trust and openness orgs taking reasonable
    measures involvement with users in design
    processes cf Kelly et al on design for people
    with learning disabilities

Alternative Resources
Accessibility 3.0 Scenario
  • Public library example
  • Presentation at national Public Library event
  • And heres a Flash-based game weve developed.
    Easy to do, and the kids love it
  • What about accessibility?
  • Oh, er. Well remove it before the new
    legislation becomes into force
  • Blended approach
  • Whats the purpose of the game?
  • To keep kids amused for 10 mins, while parents
    get books
  • How about building blocks or a bouncy castle as
    an alternative? This is an alternative approach
    to problem, which doesnt focus on disabilities

Library Standards on Alternatives
Accessibility 3.0 Scenario
  • Use Case
  • Catalogue records for books available in multiple
  • Book, large print book, abridged book, cassette
    tape, Braille, CD, MP3,
  • Need for standards to facilitate retrieval of
    resource which satisfies end users needs
  • MARC 21/RDA Developments to established library
  • AccessForAll ISO/IMS Standard aimed at
    describing alternative for learning resources
  • DCMI Accessibility metadata work

Recognition of challenges of the multiple
standardisation routes described in
Personalization and Accessibility Integration
of Library and Web Approaches, Chapman, Nevile,
Kelly and Heath
Web 3.0
Accessibility 3.0 Scenario
  • Web 3.0
  • Data working with data
  • Direct intervention by people not always needed
  • Software can make heuristic assumptions
  • Can get better as more data made available
  • The Semantic Web / Linked Data vision which
    exploits connections on the social graph

Its not the Social Network Sites that are
interesting - it is the Social Network itself.
The Social Graph. The way I am connected, not the
way my Web pages are connected. Tim Berners-Lee
Semantic Approach
Accessibility 3.0 Scenario
  • From Kevin Kellys One Machine perspective
  • It doesnt matter where the content is
  • It doesnt matter who owns the contents
  • Challenge is to exploit the connections

I express my network in a FOAF file, and that is
a start of the revolution. It is about getting
excited about connections, rather than nervous.
Tim Berners-Lee
Accessibility 3.0
Accessibility 3.0 Scenario
  • Were already seeing computer software giving us
    hints on resources which may be of interest to us
  • Note how improvements can be made
  • By system gathering more data
  • By user providing preferences and other hints
  • By others providing data
  • By author metadata

Challenge Can such developments be applied to
provide benefits to people with disabilities?
Initial Experiments
  • Project work to explore ways of enhancing
  • FLUID project
  • A community, a product, and a collection of tools
    created by an international team
  • Provides an infrastructure that enables rich
    customisations of an application's user interface
    appearance and behaviour based on the needs of
    both institutions and individual users.
  • Tools which can be integrated into popular
    education software (Uportal, Moodle, etc.)
  • Iterative design and agile development process

Semantic Web Principles
  • Principles which may be required
  • Persistent URIs for resources
  • Metadata in RDF
  • Accessibility metadata schema published on Web
  • Accessibility terms published in public
  • Applications to allow user tagging
  • Applications to provide links to equivalent
  • Openness of software, content and metadata
  • Encouragement of vendors to support

Learning From The Past
Accessibility 3.0 Scenario
  • Were starting to explore an Accessibility 3.0
  • But what lessons must we learn from Accessibility
  • We dont want a theoretical solution
  • The dangers of standardising too soon
  • The dangers of legislating too soon
  • The dangers of ignoring diversity
  • The need to get market acceptance for tools
  • The difficulties of getting market acceptance
  • Standards-based solutions may not deliver

Note that the Accessibility 3.0 vision is based
on W3C Semantic Web principles. A challenge for
W3C and user community is reconciling WAI and SW
visions and how they are interpreted.
  • Accessibility 1.0
  • WAI model is flawed
  • Evidence shows WAI approach is a political
    success, but not implemented significantly
  • Accessibility 2.0
  • Holistic approach takes pragmatic view of WCAGs
    successes applies it in a user-focussed context
    based on institutional framework
  • But neither approaches scales to the World Wide
  • Accessibility 3.0
  • Builds on Social Web and seeks to apply social
    graph to enhance accessibility of user services
  • Very early days

But can this view be sold to organisations,
governments and individuals who have bought a the
view of WAI delivering the answer? These
conclusions are aimed at the accessibility
researchers and practitioners to persuade them
that a rethink is needed
Another Interpretation
  • Accessibility 1.0
  • Based on encoding of HTML resources
  • Accessibility 2.0
  • Based on mix of the HTML (and other) resources,
    the services, the context,
  • Accessibility 3.0
  • Based on mix of above plus 'intelligence' of the
    Web in its behind-the-scenes applications e.g.
  • Semantic Web applications
  • Use and sharing of tags etc across applications
  • More atomic resource components so easier to
  • Microformats and lots of tags
  • ...

  • Theres a need
  • For accessibility researchers to gather evidence
    on proposed solutions to accessibility
  • To explore ways in which changes in our
    understandings can be adopted and deployed
  • This paper
  • Explores limitations of current approaches
  • Suggests alternative approaches
  • Future work
  • Need to critique the critique
  • Need to develop better models for change control
  • Need to learn from the past

  • Questions are welcome
About PowerShow.com