Grace Mbipom
Simon Harper
ABSTRACT
Recently, the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) upgraded its Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) from version 1.0 to 2.0. WCAG 2.0 further encourages the design of accessible Web content, and has been put in place to address the limitations of the earlier version, WCAG 1.0. The new development requires that updates be made accordingly. One of the areas affected by the transition is automated Web content accessibility evaluation and repair. Since most Accessibility Evaluation and Repair Tools (AERTs) depend on guidelines to make suggestions about potential accessibility barriers and proffer repair solutions, existing tools have to be modified to accommodate the changes WCAG 2.0 brings. In particular, more techniques for performing automated Web content accessibility evaluation and repair are desirable. The heterogeneous nature of Web content which AERTs assess, calls for techniques of cross-disciplinary origin. In this paper, we discuss the implications of the transition for automated evaluation and repair. In addition, we present a meta-review of relevant techniques from related disciplines for the purpose of informing research that surrounds testing and repair techniques employed by AERTs.
- Comparison of WCAG 1.0 Checkpoints to WCAG 2.0, in Numerical Order . Available Online at http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/from10/comparison/, Accessed 25th April, 2009.Google Scholar
- An Introduction to Classification: Feature Selection. Available online at http://www.improvedoutcomes.com/docs/WebSiteDocs/Classification and Prediction/SLAM/An Introduction to Classification.htm. Accessed 30th June, 2009.Google Scholar
- L. Ahn and L. Dabbish. Labeling Images With a Computer Game. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Vienna, Austria, ACM, pages 319 -- 326, 2004. Google ScholarDigital Library
- L. Ahn, S. Ginosar, M. Kedia, R. Liu, and M. Blum. Improving Accessibility of the Web with a Computer Game. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing System, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, ACM, pages 79 -- 82, 2006. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Aksoy. Introduction to Pattern Recognition. http://www.cs.bilkent.edu.tr/Üsaksoy/courses/cs551/slides/cs551 intro.pdf, Accessed 9th July,, 2009.Google Scholar
- J. Bigham. Increasing Web Accessibility by Automatically Judging Alternative Text Quality. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, ACM, pages 349 -- 352, 2007. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Bigham, R. Kaminsky, R. Ladner, O. Danielsson, and G. Hempton. Webinsignt: Making Web Images Accessible. In Proceedings of the 8th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility, Portland, Oregon, USA, ACM, pages 181 -- 188, 2006. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Brewer. Web Accessibility Highlights and Trends. In Proceedings of the International Cross-disciplinary Workshop on Web accessibility (W4A), ACM, 63:51 -- 55, 2004. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Brudvik, J. Bigham, A. Cavender, and R. Ladner. Hunting for Headings: Sighted Labeling vs. Automatic Classification of Headings. In Proceedings of the 10th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility, Nova Scotia, Canada, ACM, pages 201 -- 208, 2008. Google ScholarDigital Library
- B. Caldwell, M. Cooper, L. Reid, and G. Vanderheiden (Eds). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0. W3C Recommendation 11th December, 2008. http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/, Accessed 20th December , 2008.Google Scholar
- G. Caridakis, O. Diamanti, K. Karpouzis, and P. Maragos. Automatic Sign Language Recognition: Vision Based Feature Extraction and Probabilistic Recognition Scheme from Multiple Cues. In PETRA'08, Athens, Greece, ACM, 282, 2008. Google ScholarDigital Library
- I. Carlbom, I. Chakravarty, and W. Hsu. SIGGRAPH'91 Workshop Report Integrating Computer Graphics, Computer vision, and Image Processing in Scientific Applications. ACM, 26 (1):8 -- 17, 1992.Google Scholar
- R. Chandrasekar, C. Doran, and B. Srinivas. Motivations and Methods for Text Simplication. In Proceedings of the 16th Conference on Computational Linguistics, Copenhagen, Denmark, Association for Computational Linguistics Morristown, NJ, USA, 2:1041 -- 1044, 1996. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Chandrasekar and B. Srinivas. Automatic Induction of Rules for Text Simplification. Knowledge-Based Systems, Elsevier, 10 (3):183 -- 190, 1997.Google ScholarDigital Library
- W. Chisholm, G. Vanderheiden, and I. Jacobs (Eds.). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0. W3C Recommendation 5th May, 1999. http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/, Accessed 10th July, 2008.Google Scholar
- K. Collins-Thompson and J. Callan. A Language Modeling Approach to Predicting Reading Difficulty. In Proceedings of HLT / NAACL , Boston, USA, 2004.Google Scholar
- C. Colwell and H. Petrie. Evaluation of Guidelines for Designing Accessible Web Content. Position Paper for the IFIP TC.13 INTERACT'99 Workshop: Making Designers Aware of Existing Guidelines for Accessibility, Edinburgh, UK, pages 11 -- 13, 1999.Google Scholar
- R. Cucchiara, C. Grana, A. Prati, and R. Vezzani. Computer Vision Techniques for PDA Accessibility of In-house Video Surveillance. In First ACM SIGMM international workshop on Video surveillance, Berkeley, California, USA, ACM, pages 87 -- 97, 2003. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Devlin and G. Unthank. Helping Aphasic People Process Online Information. In Proceedings of the 8th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility, Portland, Oregon, USA, ACM, pages 225 -- 226, 2006. Google ScholarDigital Library
- I. Feldberg. Computer Vision and its Application to APL. Proceedings of the International Conference on APL, Sydney, Australia, ACM, pages 113 -- 119, 1987. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Fu. Introduction to Special Issue on Syntactic Pattern Recognition -- Part One. Pattern Recognition, Pergamon Press, Printed in Great Britain, Published by Elsevier Science B.V., 3 (4):343 -- 344, 1971.Google Scholar
- W. Grimson and J. Mundy. Computer Vision and its Applications. Communications of the ACM, 37 (3):44 -- 51, 1994. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Gunning. The Technique of Clear Writing. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1968.Google Scholar
- S. L. Henry. Understanding Web Accessibility. In Thatcher, Jim (Ed) Web Accessibility. Web Standards and Regulatory Compliance, 2006.Google Scholar
- A. Hors, P. Hegaret, G. Nicol, L. Wood, M. Champion, and S. Byrne. Document Object Model Core. W3C Recommendation, 07 April 2004, http://www.w3.org/TR/DOM-Level-3-Core/core.html, Accessed 14th July, 2009.Google Scholar
- M. Ivory and A. Chevalier. A Study of Automated Web Site Evaluation Tools. Technical Report UW-CSE-02-10-01, 2002.Google Scholar
- B. Kelly, D. Sloan, S. Brown, J. Seale, H. Petrie, P. Lauke, and S. Ball. Accessibility 2.0: People, Policies and Processes. In Proceedings of the International Cross-disciplinary Workshop on Web Accessibility (W4A), Banff, Canada, ACM, pages 138 -- 147, 2007. Google ScholarDigital Library
- B. Kelly, D. Sloan, L. Phipps, H. Petrie, and F. Hamilton. Forcing Standardization or Accommodating Diversity? A Framework for Applying the WCAG in the Real World. In Proceedings of the International Cross-disciplinary Workshop on Web Accessibility (W4A), Chiba, Japan, ACM, pages 46 -- 54, 2005. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Kincaid, R. Fishburn Jr., R. Rogers, and B. Chissom. Derivation of New Readability Formulas for Enlisted Navy Personnel. Research Branch Report 8-75, Naval Air Station Memphis, Millington, Tennessee, 1975.Google Scholar
- C. Lin. The Effectiveness of Dictionary and Web-based Answer Reranking. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, Taipei, Taiwan, ACL, Morristown, NJ, USA, 1:1 -- 7, 2002. Google ScholarDigital Library
- H. Liu, J. Janssen, and E. Milios. Using HMM to Learn User Browsing Patterns for Focused Web Crawling. In Data and Knowledge Engineering, Including: Sixth ACM International Workshop on Web Information and Data Management, Elsevier B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 59 (2):270 -- 291, 2006. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Mantas. Methodologies in Pattern Recognition and Image Analysis - A Brief Survey. Pattern Recognition, Elsevier Science Inc. NY, USA, 20 (1):1 -- 6, 1987. Google ScholarDigital Library
- T. McEwan and B. Weerts. Alt Text and Basic Accessibility. In Proceedings of the 21st British HCI Group Annual Conference on HCI , Lancaster, British Computer Society, UK, 2:71 -- 74, 2007. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Noruzi. A Study of Html Title Tag Creation Behaviour of Academic Web Sites. The Journal of Academic Liberianship, Elsevier Inc., 33 (4):501 -- 506, 2007.Google Scholar
- M. Olsen. Detecting Suspicious Descriptive Text in Web Pages Using Pattern Recognition. http://www.mortengoodwin.net/publicationfiles/coursepr suspicous description.pdf, Accessed 18 June, 2009.Google Scholar
- S. C. Ong and S. Ranganath. Automatic Sign Language Analysis: A Survey and the Future Beyond Lexical Meaning. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, IEEE Computer Society Washington, DC, USA, 27(6):873 -- 891, 2005. Google ScholarDigital Library
- H. Petrie and O. Kheir. The Relationship Between Accessibility and Usability of Websites. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, San Jose, Califonia, USA, ACM, pages 397 -- 406, 2007. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Pirkola. The Effects of Query Structure and Dictionary Setups in Dictionary-based Cross-language Information Retrieval. In Proceedings of the 21st Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, Melbourne, Australia, ACM, pages 55 -- 63, 1998. Google ScholarDigital Library
- X. Qi and B. Davison. Web page Classification: Features and Algorithms. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 41 (2), 2009. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Rapp and C. Vide. Example-Based Machine Translation Using a Dictionary of Word Pairs. In Proceedings, LREC, pages 1268 -- 1273, 2006.Google Scholar
- C. Ridpath and W. Chisholm. Techniques for Accessibility Evaluation and Repair Tools, w3c working draft, 26 april 2000. Available Online at http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-AERT-20000426, accessed 23rd, April, 2009.Google Scholar
- M. Rowan, P. Gregor, D. Sloan, and P. Booth. Evaluating Web Resources for Disability Access. In Proceedings of the 4th International ACM Conference on Assistive Technologies, Arlington, Virginia, USA, ACM, pages 80 -- 84, 2000. Google ScholarDigital Library
- L. Si and J. Callan. A Statistical Model for Scientific Readability. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Atlanta, Georgia, USA, ACM, pages 574 -- 576, 2001. Google ScholarDigital Library
- D. Sloan, A. Heath, F. Hamilton, B. Kelly, H. Petrrie, and L. Phipps. Contextual Web Accessibility - Maximizing the Benefit of Accessibility Guidelines. In Proceedings of the International Cross-disciplinary Workshop on Web accessibility (W4A), Edinburgh, UK, ACM, 134:121--131, 2006. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Q. Song and M. Shepperd. Mining Web Browsing Patterns for E-commerce. Computers in Industry, 57:622 -- 630, 2006. Google ScholarDigital Library
- K. Takeuchi, T. Kanehila, K. Hilao, T. Abekawa, and K. Kageura. Flexible Automatic Look-up of English Idiom Entries in Dictionaries. Machine Translation Summit XI Proceedings, pages 451 -- 458, 2007.Google Scholar
- Y. Tatsumi and T. Asahi. Analyzing Web Page Headings Considering Various Presentations. Special Interest Tracks and Posters of the 14th International Conference on World Wide Web, Chiba, Japan, ACM, pages 956 -- 957, 2005. Google ScholarDigital Library
- T. Watanabe. Experimental Evaluation of Usability and Accessibility of Heading Elements. In Proceedings of the International Cross-disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibility (W4A), Banff, Canada, ACM, 225:157 -- 164, 2007. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- The transition from web content accessibility guidelines 1.0 to 2.0: what this means for evaluation and repair
Recommendations
Beyond Web Content Accessibility Guidelines: Expert Accessibility Reviews
DSAI '16: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Software Development and Technologies for Enhancing Accessibility and Fighting Info-exclusionDespite the existence of web accessibility guidelines - e.g. Web Content Accessibility Guidelines - to help developers and designers to create more accessible websites, many websites are still not accessible. Studies showed that guidelines do not cover ...
Migrating from WCAG 1.0 to WCAG 2.0 - A comparative study based on Web Content Accessibility Guidelines in Taiwan
The primary purpose of this research was to explore a comparative analysis of the ''Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG)'' standard in Taiwan and the international WCAG standards (WCAG 1.0/WCAG 2.0). The WCAG in Taiwan was established by the ...
The BenToWeb XHTML 1.0 test suite for the web content accessibility guidelines 2.0: last call working draft
UAHCI'07: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Universal access in human-computer interaction: applications and servicesThis paper presents the work carried out under the umbrella of the EU-funded project BenToWeb to develop a complete XHTML 1.0 test suite for the W3C's Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0. Initial work covered the June 2005 working draft, which was ...
Comments