Quantitative evaluation for web accessibility with respect to disabled groups

Sirithumgul, Pornpat; Suchato, Atiwong; Punyabukkana, Proadpran

doi:10.1145/1535654.1535687

Cited by 10 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When a ratio scale is required the proposed tuning method is successful to attain tool interchangeability. Sirithumgul et al (2009) proposed the metric T 1 that normalizes WAB and applied it to different user groups by selecting the subsets of WCAG 1.0 checkpoints that impact on the blind and the deaf. In the context of the Unified Web Evaluation Methodology 6 (UWEM) a few metrics have been proposed during its development process.…”

Section: Qa Within Web Engineeringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Automatic web accessibility metrics: Where we are and where we can go

Vigo

Brajnik

2011

Interacting with Computers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tThe fact that several web accessibility metrics exist may be evidence of a lack of a comparison framework that highlights how well they work and for what purposes they are appropriate. In this paper we aim at formulating such a framework, demonstrating that it is feasible, and showing the findings we obtained when we applied it to seven existing automatic accessibility metrics. The framework encompasses validity, reliability, sensitivity, adequacy and complexity of metrics in the context of four scenarios where the metrics can be used. The experimental demonstration of the viability of the framework is based on applying seven published metrics to more than 1500 web pages and then operationalizing the notions of validity-as-conformance, adequacy and complexity. Our findings lead us to conclude that the Web Accessibility Quantitative Metric, Page Measure and Web Accessibility Barrier are the metrics that achieve the highest levels of quality (out of the seven that we examined). Finally, since we did not analyse reliability, sensitivity and validity-in-use, this paper provides guidance to address them in what are new research avenues.

show abstract

Section: Qa Within Web Engineeringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Automatic web accessibility metrics: Where we are and where we can go

Vigo

Brajnik

2011

Interacting with Computers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to Sirithumgul, Suchato and Punyabukkana [10], UWEM 1.0 is an improved version of UWEM 0.5 [19] that was developed in 2006. It is based on user feedback rather than WCAG priority levels [12].…”

Section: Unified Web Evaluation Methodology (Uwem)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This can be relevant for practitioners, like web site administrators, that need to compare subsequent releases of the same website to check for accessibility improvements. But it is also important for researchers, especially when conducting large-scale accessibility evaluations [5], comparing domains of activity [6,7], geographical areas [8,9], or user groups [10]. Recently, in the context of the European Web Accessibility Directive 1 , the different European member-states reported the results of their accessibility monitoring activities.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Large-scale study of web accessibility metrics

Martins

Duarte

2022

Univ Access Inf Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evaluating the accessibility of web resources is usually done by checking the conformance of the resource against a standard or set of guidelines (e.g., the WCAG 2.1). The result of the evaluation will indicate what guidelines are respected (or not) by the resource. While it might hint at the accessibility level of web resources, often it will be complicated to compare the level of accessibility of different resources or of different versions of the same resource from evaluation reports. Web accessibility metrics synthesize the accessibility level of a web resource into a quantifiable value. The fact that there is a wide number of accessibility metrics, makes it challenging to choose which ones to use. In this paper, we explore the relationship between web accessibility metrics. For that purpose, we investigated eleven web accessibility metrics. The metrics were computed from automated accessibility evaluations obtained using QualWeb. A set of around three million web pages were evaluated. By computing the metrics over this sample of nearly three million web pages, it was possible to identify groups of metrics that offer similar results. Our analysis shows that there are metrics that behave similarly, which, when deciding what metrics to use, assists in picking the metric that is less resource intensive or for which it might be easier to collect the inputs.

show abstract

“…Many tools offered on the market offer checking only a selected feature of a given functionality, while they do not refer to a complex check of the whole website in many aspects. The proposed algorithm is designed to meet those features and is an attempt to present a comprehensive solution for quick and efficient evaluation of a selected website (Adamand Kreps, 2006;Sirithumgul et al, 2009).…”

Section: The Need For Automated Accessibility Checksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Algorithm for Validating Financial and Economic Web Pages in Terms of Web Content Accessibility Guidelines

Probierz¹,

Jędrasiak²

2021

ERSJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose:The purpose of the research is to present the algorithm for the validation of economic and financial websites, allowing to check the degree of accessibility of these websites in terms of WCAG standards with particular attention to people with disabilities and the elderly. The developed method is automatic and allows to obtain both a general score for the analyzed page and a detailed list of analyzed aspects. Design/methodology/Approach: A two-step needs analysis process was conducted to develop the algorithm. In the first phase, the literature was analyzed for selected aspects of accessibility particularly relevant to people with disabilities and the elderly. Findings: The results made it possible to determine the general directions of the algorithm, which are particularly important for the mentioned users. The next stage was the analysis of selected aspects of the websites in the context of their relation to the groups of recipients and the possibilities of analysis by the algorithm. The result of this stage is a set of 9 aspects, within which the individual elements checked by the algorithm were dissected. Practical Implications: The results obtained indicate that the evaluation made by the algorithm coincides with the evaluation of the accessibility of the pages made by the experts. The algorithm allows us to quickly analyze web pages for accessibility and to detect general trends that characterize a given theme of pages. It allows to make general recommendations for improvements and good practices for building accessible pages according to WCAG recommendations. Originality value:The algorithm created is a proprietary project that allows the automatic evaluation of websites. It is based on 9 aspects that make up websites, with the possibility of expanding to more. It can be used to supplement expert knowledge or be used as a general tool to inform about the state of accessibility for a given page.

show abstract

Quantitative evaluation for web accessibility with respect to disabled groups

Cited by 10 publications

References 3 publications

Automatic web accessibility metrics: Where we are and where we can go

Automatic web accessibility metrics: Where we are and where we can go

Large-scale study of web accessibility metrics

Algorithm for Validating Financial and Economic Web Pages in Terms of Web Content Accessibility Guidelines

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About