Transition of accessibility evaluation tools to new standards

Abstract

While automatic tools are not intended to replace human judgement they are crucial in order to develop accessible web sites. The release of WCAG 2.0 entails that the existing plethora of accessibility review tools will have to be updated. This paper presents an evaluation framework for making the transition from WCAG 1.0 to WCAG 2.0 in a less painful way. A framework is thus proposed that allows developers to create new guidelines, and update or reuse the existing ones. A case study to test its feasibility has been carried out by incorporating WCAG 2.0 guidelines into the framework. The results are satisfactory, since 55% of the automatic and 16% of the semi-automatic ones could be expressed using the framework. Therefore, it is demonstrated that even if the framework does not fully support the transition process, at least it makes it less burdensome. Moreover, by analyzing WCAG 2.0 we have learnt how to extend the existing tools in order to provide greater coverage and thus increase their effectiveness.

Benchmarking web accessibility evaluation tools

“…This figure is consistent with previous research on the automation limits of usability evaluation [3,10,11], which establish that around 44-55% of tests can be automated.…”

The challenges of Web accessibility: The technical and social aspects of a truly universal Web

“…Since the introduction of WCAG 2.0 an exhaustive amount of exemplar, tutorial and implementation resources have developed around the application of the POUR guidelines and the accessibility techniques available within each (Aizpurua, et al, 2009). As well as the materials available via the W3C, WAI and WebAIM Web sites, there are numerous blogs and meetup groups dedicated to the ongoing implementation and advocacy for the use of WCAG across all aspects, of the Web, from small business, to large governments and multinational corporations.…”

Investigating accessibility on web-based maps

“…According to Aizpurua et al [7], accessibility guidelines usually present generic accessibility tests, such as: automated tests, manual tests and semi-automatic tests or involving generic problems. The authors define the tests as: a) automated testing: a validation test that usually does not need or require to be done by a person and can be performed by a tool; b) manual or semiautomatic testing: requires the human component.…”