Ensuring accessibility of electronic information resources for visually impaired people

Abstract

The article addresses the importance of clarifying terminology such as visually impaired and related terms before embarking on accessibility studies of electronic information resources in library contexts. Apart from briefly defining accessibility, the article attempts to address the lack of in-depth definitions of terms such as visually impaired, blind, partially sighted, etc. that has been noted in the literature indexed by two major Library and Information Science databases. The purpose is to offer a basis for selecting participants in studies of accessibility of electronic information resources in library contexts, and to put discussions of such studies in context. Design/methodology/approach: Clarification of concepts concerning visual impairment following a literature survey based on searching two major databases in Library and Information Science. To put the discussion in context accessibility is also briefly defined. Findings: Although visually impaired and a variety of related terms such as blind, partially sighted, visually disabled, etc. are used in the Library and Information Science literature, hardly any attempt is made to define these terms in depth. This can be a serious limitation in web and electronic accessibility evaluations and the selection of participants. Practical implications: Clearly distinguishing between categories of visually impaired people and the ability of sight of participants is important when selecting participants for studies on accessibility for visually impaired people, e.g. the accessibility evaluation of websites, digital libraries and other electronic information resources. Originality/value: The article can make a contribution to the clarification of terminology essential for the selection of participants in accessibility studies, as well as enriching the literature on accessibility for visually impaired people in the context of Library and Information Science.

Understanding Authentication Method Use on Mobile Devices by People with Vision Impairment

“…We compared the use between the two groups (blind and low vision). We found the use of the following assistive devices were significantly larger by blind participants than by participants with low vision: screen readers The results on the use of screen magnifiers and screen readers are consistent with previous research [3]. But our results also indicate people who are blind require the use of more assistive technologies than people with low vision, except for devices that support the use of residual vision.…”

“…According to Kleynhans and Fourie [3], the terms visually impaired, partially sighted and low vision are used interchangeably in the literature to indicate residual vision. In our survey, we opted to use the term vision impaired, in accordance with the World Health Organization (WHO)…”

Defining, evaluating, and achieving accessible library resources

“…The first is the medical model, of which the ADA’s definition is an example, which essentially views the person with an impairment as broken. Andreas Kleynhans and Fourie (2014) emphasize that the flaw of the medical model is that it conflates individual impairment with disability and “views disability in terms of disease process, abnormality and personal tragedy”. Lewthwaite (2014) adds that standards in the mold of the medical model do not address the complexity and diversity of disabilities across different contexts, and she encourages us to look beyond Western norms and definitions of “disability”.…”

“…In the built environment, this could mean ramps instead of stairs or tactile and audible warning devices at street intersections. In the digital realm, usability and technical accessibility are generally recognized as inseparable components of accessibility (Oud, 2011; Conway et al , 2012; Southwell and Slater, 2012; Andreas Kleynhans and Fourie, 2014; Yesilada et al , 2015). Inclusion is close to the heart of librarianship; everyone agrees that accessibility is desirable and good; we have decades of legal and technical guidance to follow.…”

Integration of accessibility design patterns with the software implementation process of ISO/IEC 29110

“…6,8 According to Schmutz et al,8 in recent studies, more than 95% of websites investigated were classified as not accessible, which means that the specific needs of people with different forms of visual disabilities, including blindness, are not sufficiently considered. 9 Despite the fact that there are a large percentage of software companies classified as very small entities (VSEs), relatively few studies have focused on the actual processes that they are using. 10 A VSE is defined as "an enterprise, an organization, a department or a project having up to 25 people" 11 and according to Sanchez-Gordon et al, 7 VSEs account for 85% of software development organizations in the European Union, 57% in the United States, 80% in Canada, and 90% in Ecuador.…”