1. A centre of expertise in digital information managementwww.ukoln.ac.uk The Accessible Web Accessibility 2.0: A Holistic And User- Centred Approach To Web Accessibility Brian Kelly UKOLN University of Bath Bath Email B.Kelly@ukoln.ac.uk UKOLN is supported by: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/web-focus/events/conferences/museums-web-2007/ This work is licensed under a Attribution- NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 licence (but note caveat) Resources bookmarked using ‘ ukmw07 ' tag Acceptable Use Policy Recording/broadcasting of this talk, taking photographs, discussing the content using email, instant messaging, blogs, SMS, etc. is permitted providing distractions to others is minimised. Acceptable Use Policy Recording/broadcasting of this talk, taking photographs, discussing the content using email, instant messaging, blogs, SMS, etc. is permitted providing distractions to others is minimised.

2. A centre of expertise in digital information managementwww.ukoln.ac.uk 2 Contents Reflections on today’s themes Web accessibility & innovation Revisiting Web accessibility: Contextualising Web accessibility: What Next?

3. A centre of expertise in digital information managementwww.ukoln.ac.uk 3 Today’s Talks What have we heard about today: Museums 2.0: just do it How tagging can help Potential of Second Life Maybe Semantic Web has a role The challenges of the personalised Web and the ethical Web What do you think: Toys for the boys? Or not?

4. A centre of expertise in digital information managementwww.ukoln.ac.uk 4 Accessibility and Innovation “I’m looking at Web 2.0 / Museum Mashups / Facebook / Second Life /…. What do people think about these technologies?” Common responses: We are committed to complying with accessibility guidelines; we won’t be driven by new technologies But might this actually mean: We can’t be bothered We’re threatened We’re scared … What if new technologies actually enhance accessibility? What if the accessibility guidelines are out-of-date?

5. A centre of expertise in digital information managementwww.ukoln.ac.uk 5 Where Does Accessibility Fit In? What is your view? Web innovations typically add to the accessibility barriers people with disabilities face: Need for caution and delaying innovation until accessibility features are developed  Can’t decide; it’s too complicated  Web innovations often enhance accessibility: Opportunity to exploit innovations and gain experiences

6. A centre of expertise in digital information managementwww.ukoln.ac.uk 6 My Views My thoughts on this: We’ve interpreted accessibility incorrectly It’s not about:  Control  Rules  Universal solutions  An IT Problem  A worry  Avoiding being sued It is not about:  Empowering people  Widening participation  Contextual solutions  Blended solutions  A great opportunity  Being appreciated

7. A centre of expertise in digital information managementwww.ukoln.ac.uk 7 Background: W3C WAI & WCAG W3C (World Wide Web Consortium): Body responsible for coordinating development of Web standards WAI (Web Accessibility Initiative): W3C group responsible for developing guidelines which will ensure Web resources are widely accessible WCAG (Web Content Accessibility Guidelines): One of three sets of WAI guidelines. WCAG provides advice of accessibility on Web content (e.g. HTML pages) Other two WAI guidelines cover accessible user agents (UAAG) and accessible authoring tools (ATAG) Review: WAI Approach

8. A centre of expertise in digital information managementwww.ukoln.ac.uk 8 The WAI Model The WAI model for Web accessibility is based on three components: Content Authoring Tools Browsers Assumption: do three right  universal accessibility But: We have no control over browsers & authoring tools The browsers and authoring tools aren't great The content guidelines are flawed What if users are happy with their existing browser? Review: WAI Approach

9. A centre of expertise in digital information managementwww.ukoln.ac.uk 9 Interpretation of WAI WCAG How do you interpret WAI WCAG (must use ALT tags for images; HTML must be valid; must use style sheets for presentation; …): Mandatory, with following characteristics: Clearly defined rules Objective Checking mostly objective Penalties for non-compliance Similar to checking that HTML complies with the standard Advisory, with following characteristics: Useful guidelines, to be interpreted in context It's about providing useful, usable resources It's contextual Checking mostly subjective It's similar to checking that a Web site is well-designed Which reflects your organisations’ view most closely? BK Review: WAI Approach

10. A centre of expertise in digital information managementwww.ukoln.ac.uk 10 Limitations of the WAI Model WAI approach has shortcomings: WAI model relies on conformant Web sites, conformant authoring tools, conformant user agents …and conformant users! WCAG guidelines have flaws ("must use W3C formats; must use latest versions; …") Has a Web-only view of the world:  What about other IT solutions?  What about blended (real world) solutions? Has a belief in a single universal solution:  But isn't accessibility a very complex issue  Is it reasonable to expect an ideal solution to be developed at the first attempt? Limitations

11. A centre of expertise in digital information managementwww.ukoln.ac.uk 11 What do we mean by Web accessibility? Can we provide accessible Web services without a clear understanding of what we mean by this? Small group exercise: What do we mean by Web accessibility? Where does usability fit in? Where does interoperability fit in? E

12. A centre of expertise in digital information managementwww.ukoln.ac.uk 12 Usability & Interoperability What about: Usability Interoperability http://www.rnib.org.uk/xpedio/groups/public/documents/code/InternetHome.hcsp Example: Long, application-specific URLs can cause accessibility/usability and interoperability problems Addition Problems: We’ve got WCAG AA (and checked with users)  We don’t need to do anymore (it’s costly)  We don’t need to address usability The focus on priority levels can limit what’s done

13. A centre of expertise in digital information managementwww.ukoln.ac.uk 13 Diversity – Content WAI guidelines focus on informational Web sites: Here’s the train timetable – I want the information and I want it now This is reasonable and desirable But is this approach always relevant to learning and cultural contexts: Here’s something – you must interpret it (and being wrong can be part of the learning process) Context

14. A centre of expertise in digital information managementwww.ukoln.ac.uk 14 Universal Accessibility?

15. A centre of expertise in digital information managementwww.ukoln.ac.uk 15 Holistic Approach See Developing A Holistic Approach For E-Learning Accessibility by Kelly, Phipps & Swift QHow do you make highly interactive e-learning services universally accessibility (e.g. 3D model of molecules)? AIf this would be unreasonable, make the learning outcomes (rather than e-learning resources) accessible. Our Work Can we apply this approach to cultural resources, with an emphasis on providing a diversity of cultural experiences?

16. A centre of expertise in digital information managementwww.ukoln.ac.uk 16 Articulating the Approach The "Tangram Metaphor" developed to avoid checklist / automated approach: W3C model has limitations Jigsaw model implies single solution Tangram model seeks to avoid such problems This approach: Encourages developers to think about a diversity of solutions Focus on 'pleasure' it provides to user This approach: Encourages developers to think about a diversity of solutions Focus on 'pleasure' it provides to user Our Work

17. A centre of expertise in digital information managementwww.ukoln.ac.uk 17 Tangram Model & Testability "WCAG 2.0 success criteria are written as testable statements …" (nb. automated & human testing ) Issues: What about WCAG principles that don't have defined success criteria (e.g. "content must be understandable")? What about 'baselines' – context only known locally What about differing models or / definitions of 'accessibility'? Note vendors of accessibility testing services will market WCAG tools e.g. see posting on BSI PAS 78 Tangram model can be used within WCAG Distinguish between testable (ALT tags) and subjective (content understandable) Supports baselines Baseline 1 Testable Our Work

18. A centre of expertise in digital information managementwww.ukoln.ac.uk 18 Accessibility 2.0 Paper Paper presented at W4A 2007 conference: “I don’t disagree – but WAI focusses on accessibility of Web resources” Our misunderstanding of WAI’s role: Decide on the services you wish to provide, then look at accessibility not: Look at accessibility guidelines to see what is allowed Note this ties in with Seb Chan’s talk on the processes for selecting technologies

19. A centre of expertise in digital information managementwww.ukoln.ac.uk 19 WCAG 2.0 Latest WCAG 2.0 draft is much improved Focus on four key principles (POUR): Perceivable: Information and user interface components must be perceivable by users Operable: User interface components must be operable by users Understandable: Information and operation of user interface must be understandable by users Robust: Content must be robust enough that it can be interpreted reliably by a wide variety of user agents, including assistive technologies Note WCAG 2.0 draft removes some of the flawed guidelines – and HTML compliance is toned down. This may result in many Web sites will enhance their WCAG rating overnight!

20. A centre of expertise in digital information managementwww.ukoln.ac.uk 20 WCAG & Holistic Context Proposal for a museum’s accessibility policy: Museum services will seek to engage its audiences, attract new & diverse audiences,... Museum will take reasonable measures to maximise access to its services. Interpretations: Second Life, Web 2.0, … to attract new audiences (e.g. young people) Reasonable measures to ensure Web 2.0 is widely accessible (e.g. WCAG if possible)

21. A centre of expertise in digital information managementwww.ukoln.ac.uk 21 On Reasonableness How do we know what is reasonable? Every page must be WCAG AA compliant (including HTML-compliance, even if 99% of Web pages fail this test) No Podcasting, as can’t be heard by deaf users (to hell with blind users) No Flash – even if people say they like it No surrealism – people won’t understand it Or: Staff training so they’re informed of best practices Sharing our approaches – and learning from others Engaging with our user communities Doing what museums are expected to do

22. A centre of expertise in digital information managementwww.ukoln.ac.uk 22 Not In Isolation How do we: Develop staff? Enhance the effectiveness of our approaches? Develop an understand on what is reasonable? Answers: Documenting policies Sharing our experiences Sharing our resources Discussing and debating

23. A centre of expertise in digital information managementwww.ukoln.ac.uk 23 An Emerging Roadmap Accessibility Summit II held in Nov 2006 agreed: Need for a manifesto:  Building on WAI’s foundations  Developing a user-centric approach  Developing a contextual model  Developing an evidence-based approach A roadmap for future work:  Engagement with disability communities  Engagement with WAI  Identifying areas of research  Gathering case studies of best practices  … Follow-up workshop took place at MW 2007

24. A centre of expertise in digital information managementwww.ukoln.ac.uk 24 Application to Second Life How do I make SL accessible? Wrong question – ask: “How do I maximise the accessibility of my museum?” Solutions: Wheelchair ramps Web sites Accessible Web sites Web experiences Immersive environments … A portfolio of solutions aimed at widening participation Compare with the BBC. Is the radio universally accessible to the deaf – or do the BBC have a portfolio of channels?

25. A centre of expertise in digital information managementwww.ukoln.ac.uk 25 Next Steps for Museums At MW 2007: Museums wiki service described Accessibility 2.0 added to wiki An opportunity for you: Use this to briefly summarise your approaches to accessibility 2.0 (And keep copy for use elsewhere) http://museums.wikia.com/ wiki/Accessibility_2.0 http://museums.wikia.com/ wiki/Accessibility_2.0

26. A centre of expertise in digital information managementwww.ukoln.ac.uk 26 Just Do It!! What not to do: Seek 2 year funding in order to explore implications, set up case study database, QA processes, … Instead: Write case study on the train home! Document what you’ve done - you’ve probably adopted a user-focussed approach anyway! (cf. Tate’s i-Map work described by Caro Howell 2 years ago)

27. A centre of expertise in digital information managementwww.ukoln.ac.uk 27 What Next? What should the next steps be in development of approaches for Web accessibility in a museum context?