View
227
Download
1
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
Testing for Accessibility and
Usability
Is Your Site Accessible and Usable or Just Conformant?
Presenters
Jason White – Co-Chair, Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group
Naomi Heagney – The Hiser Group
Andrew Arch – Vision Australia Foundation
W3C and Accessibility Success Criteria
Jason White
WCAG 1.0
Issues with conformance
WCAG 2.0
Testable success criteriaAbstraction and specificity
Definition of testabilityEither machine testable or human testable
Introduction of review requirements into success criteriaE.g. text equivalent
WCAG 2.0 continued
WCAG 2.0 is multi layeredDesign principlesGuidelines and CheckpointsTechniques for technologies
Test cases as part of techniquesMachine testableHuman testableNon-testable
A Usability Perspective
Naomi Heagney
Usability & Accessibility
What is Usability?
Similarities and differencesFocusResourcesMethodStandards and legislation
What is Usability?
Usability is the extent to which a product can be used by specified users to achieve specified goals with effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction in a specified context of use.
– Definition from ISO 9241-11
What is Usability?
User Centred Design (UCD) is an iterative and collaborative methodology:
AnalysisDesign Evaluation
Usability is not just “lab testing”Reviews, walkthroughs, in-situ testing
Similarities
The people
Involvement in development processes IntegratedThe earlier the better
Need knowledge of:Target audiencePersonal characteristics
Differences
Focus Conformance versus site improvementQualitative & quantitative dataMeasures for usability are project-specific
ResourcesDifferent specialist knowledge required
Differences
Evaluation methodsLess emphasis on automated tools Variety of techniques, scalable to project
constraints
Standards & legislationFocus on process rather than productWCAG & checkpoints provide excellent
basis for legislative support
Accessibility Testing
Andrew Arch
Concept and Design Review
Critical consideration of end-to-end process
Identify:ObjectiveOptions for implementation
Assess strategies that could be used Consider requirements on the user
Manual Checking
Requires knowledge and understanding
Involves:Reviewing contentReviewing codeUser testing
Site Testing by Assistive Technology Users
Complements technical accessibility testing, but does not replace it.
Purpose is to appreciate usability issues for users of assistive technology.
User testing CANNOT determine if a site or online object works with all assistive technology.
User testers need to be skilled, but not expert with their technology.
Technical Accessibility Checking
Automated ToolsAll do a partial jobAll have flaws or weaknessesInterpretation needed (manual
checking and rectification)
Many “pseudo tools” are available by using the options included as standard within your computer
Evaluation & Repair Tools
Browser settingsBuilt-in checkingColour checkersLink checkersThe Wave
A-PromptTidyCode validatorsCommercial
Tools
Full list: http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/existingtools.html
Pseudo Tools – Browser Setting Options
Change the font to a larger size
View pages without images
View pages with styles sheets and pages colours/fonts disabled
View pages with an alternative, high contrast, colour scheme
Use the keyboard not the mouse to navigate
Disable scripts, applets and/or plugins
Try different browsers & versions
Built in Checking – eg. Dreamweaver
See also WAI Authoring Tools guidelines
Colour Checkers
Colour Contrast http://www.lighthouse.org/
color_contrast.htm http://aprompt.snow.utoronto.ca/
ColorVisibilityProgram.html (Beta version)
Colour tester – colour blind http://www.tesspub.com/colours.html http://www.vischeck.com/
Legible text http://www.lighthouse.org/print_leg.htm
Link Checkers
Link checkers: non-existent URLshttp://www.linkalarm.com/http://www.tetranetsoftware.com/
solutions/linkbot/looking-for-linkbot.asp http://www.cyberspyder.com/cslnkts1.htmlhttp://validator.w3.org/checklink
Cannot check for incorrect addresses
The Wave
Pros Visual Shows reading order Shows logical
structure Shows suspect ALT
text Identifies scripts as a
potential accessibility issue
Cons No fixes No
recommendations
http://www.temple.edu/inst_disabilities/piat/wave/
A-Prompt
Pros Offers repairs Alt text registry
Cons Slow to use Repairs code Interactive
http://www.aprompt.ca/
TidyPros Offers to fix code Formats HTML Works with
HTML/XHTML/ Cleans up Word
conversions Advice on
accessibility & internationalisation
Pros …cont GUI front-end
available Interfaces with
several authoring tools
Cons Very technical
http://www.w3.org/people/Raggett/tidy/
Code Validators
HTML Validator W3C: http://validator.w3.org/NetMechanic, WebDesignGroup
CSS Validatorhttp://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/
SMIL Validatorhttp://www.cwi.nl/~media/symm/validator/
Site Evaluation & Repair Tools(Commercial, but with free limited checks or trials)
Bobby (Watchfire) http://bobby.watchfire.com/bobby/html/en/
index.jsp
Lift Online (Usablenet) http://www.usablenet.com/
Ask Alice (SSB Technology) http://askalice.ssbtechnologies.com:8080/
askalice/index.html
Accverify (HiSoftware) http://www.hisoftware.com/access/sitetest.htm
Things to consider
Management Considerations
How much will it cost?
What can “I” do?
Where do we need help?
What is the developers role?
What can I expect of “off the shelf” software?
What about outsourced sites?
References
Evaluating Websites for Accessibilityhttp://www.w3.org/WAI/eval/Overview.html
The WAVEhttp://www.temple.edu/instituteondisabilities/piat/wave/
Tidyhttp://tidy.sourceforge.net/
A-Prompthttp://www.aprompt.ca/
Recommended