|
|
The material below is from a list server run by the Benton Foundation and gives a useful summary of some of the accessibility issues involving the worldwide web. There is subscription information for the list at the end of the message for those who are interested.
Clifford Lynch
Director, CNI.
---------------------------
Access and Accessibility
The Digital Beat -- vol. 2, no. 24
I. Introduction
II. Disabilities and the World Wide Web
Components of Accessibility
Content: Designer Level
Technologies: Protocol level
Tools: Browser level
III. Obstacles to Full Web Accessibility
Cost and Difficulty
The Obstacles and Myths
IV. Legislative and Regulatory Policies
V. Conclusion
I. Introduction
The discussion of the digital divide employs the concept of information
"haves" and "have nots." This definition, which often focuses on the
issues of race and economics, has in many ways helped popularize the
concept of the digital divide. However, when one speaks of the
particulars of technology inequity and attempts to devise solutions,
continuing to define the digital divide by economic and racial "haves"
and "have nots" is not entirely appropriate. Instead, the digital divide is better represented as a continuum of
divides. This continuum recognizes that access to technology does not
and should not automatically imply accessibility. "Accessible" and
"accessibility" is distinguished from "access" in this way: access is
being able to get to a computer for its use. Access focuses on the
availability of hardware, software, infrastructure and -- in the case of
libraries and community technology centers -- service hours and trained
staff. "Accessibility" refers to whether or not the technology allows
end-users to make use of the technology. Just as technology skills and
relevant content are integral components to bridging the digital divide,
accessible design for people with disabilities is essential to making
the Internet truly universal. II. Disabilities and the World Wide Web
The World Wide Web offers enormous potential for civic engagement,
education, information, and employment. But for all Americans to benefit from the promise of the Internet, Web sites and the information
contained within must be made accessible to all people. The disabled,
many of whom are unemployed or underemployed, are often a marginalized
group in our society. The Internet is a boon because the digital nature
of information and ready access to computers frees them from the
restrictions of physical retrieval. New information and communications
technologies can improve the quality of life for people with
disabilities, "but only if such technologies are designed from the
beginning so that everyone can use them," said President Clinton in a
letter in support of the Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI). Unfortunately, there exists a range of challenges built into the
technologies and the current employment of them. For example, the
visually impaired - those who have low or hazy vision, nearsightedness,
tunnel vision, colorblindness or severe case of astigmatisms -- multimedia presentations, small type faces, low or poorly contrasting
color schemes and small icons can make using electronic media difficult. As there is no existing standards to which commercial Internet sites
must be designed - and no oversight body to regulate design -- many
visually impaired users can be shut out of a potentially useful Web site because of poor design elements. Those with physical impairments, such as multiple sclerosis, palsy, or
various forms of arthritis may find the task of manipulating a mouse,
typing, dual-key keyboard commands, and mouse/key combinations
difficult. Those with severe mobility impairments must employ assisted
Web navigation using expensive and experimental navigation equipment. Those with hearing disabilities may not be able to distinguish audible
computer prompts, make use of online video, or participate in online
presentations that make use of auditory elements. Still others, with
less severe restrictions may find the task of highlighting, mouse clicks
and manipulating pull-down boxes difficult. The stakes of Internet accessibility are great. While some are born
with a disability, many more people experience disabling impairments as
they grow older, significantly increasing the percentage of those with a disability as age increases. The U.S. Census Bureau reported in 1995
that at the end of 1994, 20 percent of the population, about 54 million
people, had some level of disability. Approximately 10 percent or 26
million people had a severe disability. Worldwide it is estimated that
500 million have a disability of some type. Components of Accessibility
The World Wide Web Consortium's (W3C) Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) addresses accessibility on the level of core technologies, develops guidelines for design, builds tools, monitors research and sponsors outreach and education programs. The WAI has published two
style guides to accessible Web sites and is completing a third. It is the position of the WAI that Web accessibility should be seen as
inexpensive in building new web pages and redesigning old ones. As the W3C is concerned with maintaining Internet interoperability across
computer system platforms and software, accessibility is also seen as a natural part of the move toward palm-top and alternative Web access
systems. On February 9, 2000, in a statement before the House Judiciary
committee, Judy Brewer, Director of presented a three-level definition
of accessibility that is useful for this discussion:
Content: Designer level
Many, but not all solutions are at the content/Web designer level. The
choices that Web page designers make about multimedia use, font sizes,
color schemes, image placement and background patterns can have a big
effect on how useable their pages are for disabled users. Many
resources exist to aid Web designers in their accessibility strategies,
including the WAI's user guides and corporate web pages such as
Microsoft's Accessibility pages. (http://www.microsoft/enable/)
Most of the solutions designers can incorporate are both affordable and considered just plain "good coding." For example, red text on a black background is nearly impossible to perceive for those that are
colorblind or have low vision. An example of "good coding" that
dramatically enhances a page's usability is the use of "ALT" tags,
alternative text descriptions, with images. Their use is a standard and simple way to make an image file accessible to the screen reading
software that the visually impaired use. In recent debates over the applicability of the American with
Disabilities Act to Web design, opponents have argued that requirements
to make Web pages accessible would put an onerous burden on designers. Accessibility advocates, however, argue that when designers take
disabled access to their sites into account during the design stage,
creating an accessible page is no more difficult than designing the page
in the first place. Most web tools will prompt designers to enter
accessibility codes, such as ALT tags. Products such as Symantec's
Homesite will even tell a Web page builder that they have made a mistake
if ALT tags are not used. Technologies: Protocol level
A whole different set of accessibility solutions applies at the protocol
level of technology - the core code used in Web pages and browsers. The Web is a cross-platform medium because browsers, Web servers, and
routers recognize - and agree on - basic forms of communication which
are called "protocols". Protocols of various types explain the form of
Internet communication, the means by which it should travel and what
should be done with the information when it arrives at its destination. URL's designate addresses, HTTP designates a means of information
access, etc. In this same sense, there are core-level Web protocols
that allow for closed captioning of multimedia streams such as
RealVideo. As the Internet becomes accessible through a range of
devices such as phones, cars, and even toasters the protocols that
enable these new technologies must also incorporate accessibility
standards. Digital television, for example has the potential to more easily carry
closed and open captioning. The digital format would allow for both a
text and audio description stream simultaneous with the standard
multimedia streams. A broad standard for how this will have to be
adopted to allow for easy and voluntary participation. The same
recognition applies for adapting new technologies to existing assistive
technologies such as screen readers that either read Web pages aloud, or turn them into Braille. Widespread acceptance of accessibility
guidelines is an essential step in fully including all who would
participate online. The WAI is working for the acceptance and perpetuation of protocols that
allow for captioning of multimedia presentation, the recognition of ALT
tags and the like in the languages used in handhelds and other
alternative web technologies. Tools: Browser level
Still other solutions apply at the level of Web browsers such as
Internet Explorer, Netscape Navigator, or Opera. Support for keyboard
commands and mouse commands are the bare minimum. Browser level support
also includes documentation on how to used the accessibility features,
providing keyboard support for mouse commands and full support for
protocol-level technology. Browser level accessibility also extends to interface design and support
for the assistive technologies (screen readers, light pens, magnifiers)
employed by the disabled, as well as, easily-locatable directions on how
to use accessibility features that are built into browsers. III. Obstacles to Full Web Accessibility
Cost and Difficulty
The most often cited argument against Web accessibility is cost. It is
important to note that existing Web content accessibility guidelines are
not requirements, they are guides for good design. Most accessibility
guidelines reflect that not all pages require the same level of
accessibility. The WAI's guidelines are prioritized by importance, so
that developers can see the most important - and simple solutions first. Building in accessibility for most pages is a matter of degree and is
not particularly costly or difficult. On more complex sites, those generated by databases, the scripts which
generate the pages can be set up to account for accessibility guidelines
-- actually proportionately driving down the cost of implementing
accessibility standards. The costs of captioning a multimedia presentation is relatively low
compared to the cost of the production itself. However, the challenges
of obtaining copyright permissions to go retro-fit existing
presentations can be extremely difficult. Those designing multimedia
presentations should consider their options when in the design process. As mentioned earlier, the RealAudio and RealVideo formats support
captioning. Designers and producers should be aware of these options
when setting out to design material. The Obstacles and Myths
Several misunderstandings, obstacles and myths have hampered the full
uptake of accessibility strategies. The National Council on Disability wrote in 1998 that, "the most
significant barriers preventing people with disabilities from achieving
full and equal access to multimedia products are lack of knowledge and
awareness among multimedia companies and the market they serve
concerning access issues, the costs involved in developing access
solutions, and technological challenges."
This lack of knowledge has given rise to some widely held myths. The
first myth is that accessibility means a text-only version of all web
pages. In fact, graphics on web pages are not a hindrance to
accessibility. It is unlabeled (ALT tag) graphics and graphics-only
systems which present problems. The W3C's Web Content Accessibility
Guidelines "strongly discourage the use of text-only pages for
accessibility." However, when there is a need for text-only pages,
current authoring tools (including Powerpoint!) give the option of a
text only feature. Database-driven sites, again, can also be configured
to generate text pages. The second myth is that every page that exists will have to be torn down
and redone. This too, is not entirely correct. While many
organizations will have to redo their Web pages to make them accessible,
many go through periodic revamping of their Web sites, anyway. These
times are the moment to address accessibility issues. Even the current
discussion over the application of the ADA to the Web focused on classes
of Web sites, instead of the entire Web in general. Finally, the myth that accessible web pages will put small and
medium-sized e-businesses out of business. There is a market incentive
to make pages accessible. With such a large portion of the wired world
having a disability, e-commerce designers that fail to account for the
size and buying potential of this group are effectively denying
themselves entire markets of consumes. IV. Legislative and Regulatory Policies
It is unlikely that accessibility issues would receive "mainstream"
attention if not for the efforts of disabilities advocates. Federal
law, as far as it goes, has helped their cause. In 1998 the Rehabilitation Act of 1990 was amended to include Section
508. Section 508 covers two key issues. First, it requires federal
agencies that develop, procure, maintain, or use electronic information
technology to make that technology accessible to disabled federal
employees. Secondly, it requires that the technologies be accessible to
disabled members of the public. The section covers Web sites put up "by
about 105 federal departments and agencies," according to a November,
1999 New York Times article. The administration recently announced that
every federal department will make its Web presence accessible by the
end of the year. Section 255, Access by Persons with Disabilities, of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, places the burden of regulating access
by persons with disabilities on the FCC. The FCC's Disabilities Issues Task Force Web page (http://www.fcc.gov/dtf/) opens with this greeting from Chairman Kennard:
"People with disabilities must have equal access to the information age;
the Federal Communications Commission has an obligation to ensure that
telecommunications are accessible and usable to the 54 million Americans
with disabilities. Equal telecommunications access, by breaking down
barriers and accelerating progress towards full participation, is
critical to our nation's success. The curb cut to the twenty-first
century is technology and every American should have equal access to
this tool."
However, much is left to be done within the purview of these two pieces
of legislation. In addition, copyright barriers that restrict or hinder
captioning and video description should be lowered. V. Conclusion
The disabled, already underserved in many ways, are being kept from
using potentially quality-of-life enhancing Web technologies. The steps
needed to enable their use of these technologies are not onerous, but do
take the continued participation of many groups on several levels on
interaction. Government agencies, foundations and corporations should engage in
collaborative research on the needs of multimedia and Web technology
development that would support accessibility. This research would go a long way in developing awareness and highlighting innovative market
solutions to accessibility challenges. Finally, those agencies of government responsible for promoting and
regulating accessibility compliance should continue to encourage
voluntary participation in existing Web accessibility guidelines even as they look to include accessibility features as basic parts of developing technologies. --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accessibility Resources:
"Access to Multimedia Technology by People with Sensory Disabilities."
National Council on Disability. (1998)
"U.S. Law Aims at Helping Disabled." New York Times. November 1999.
http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/11/cyber/articles/12access.html
W3C's Web Accessibility Initiative, http://www.w3.org/WAI/:
Microsoft's Accessibility Pages, http://www.microsoft.com/enable/
U.S. House of Representatives Commission on the Judiciary hearings on the ADA's applicability to the Internet Witness testimony,
http://www.house.gov/judiciary/2.htm
Yahoo! Fullcoverage News on the Disabled and the Internet,
http://fullcoverage.yahoo.com/fc/World/Disabilities_and_the_Disabled/
"Access to Multimedia Technology by People with Sensory Disabilities."
National Council on Disability. (1997)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(c)Benton Foundation, 2000. Redistribution of this email publication -- both internally and externally -- is encouraged if it includes this message. This and past issues of Digital Beat are available online at
(http://www.benton.org/DigitalBeat/). The Digital Beat is a free online news service of the Benton Foundation's Communications Policy & Practice program (http://www.benton.org/cpphome.html).
*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*
To subscribe to the Benton Communications-Related Headlines,
send email to: listserv@cdinet.com
In the body of the message, type only:
subscribe benton-compolicy YourFirstName YourLastName
To unsubscribe, send email to:
listserv@cdinet.com
In the body of the message, type only:
signoff benton-compolicy
If you have any problems with the service, please direct them to
benton@benton.org
|
|