eu web accessibility observatory madrid “november” 2009
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: EU Web Accessibility Observatory Madrid “November” 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649da15503460f94a8d0f4/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
EU Web Accessibility Observatory
Madrid
“November” 2009
![Page 2: EU Web Accessibility Observatory Madrid “November” 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649da15503460f94a8d0f4/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
2
INTECO
![Page 3: EU Web Accessibility Observatory Madrid “November” 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649da15503460f94a8d0f4/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
3
Web Accessibility Audit
Public Administration Websites accessibility audit
• Accessibility requirements of the Spanish Standard UNE 139803.
• Inclusion of solutions for the problems identified.
• Technical and executive summaries.
Monitoring reports / Periodic reviews
• Analysis done based on previous reports.
• Tracks the tasks performed for correction and improvement.
![Page 4: EU Web Accessibility Observatory Madrid “November” 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649da15503460f94a8d0f4/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
4
Web Accessibility Monitor
• Based on WCAG 1.0
• 30 Public Web sites studied in threesegments
• Twice per year (three so far)
• Sample of 10 pages per site
(25 in the first and the second year)
• Accessibility check:• Level I: 11 points tested
(Level I for WAI-A)
• Level II: 10 points tested
(Level I + II for WAI-AA)
• Analysis of the results• Data consolidation
• Comparison charts
• Global evaluation
• Conclusions
8,33
1,25
7,77
4,86
9,53
6,756,14
7,66
5,23
8,40
0,00
1,00
2,00
3,00
4,00
5,00
6,00
7,00
8,00
9,00
10,00
Pun
tuac
ione
s M
edia
s de
Res
ulta
dos
2.1.1 2.1.2 2.1.3 2.1.4 2.1.5 2.2.1 2.2.2 2.2.3 2.2.4 2.2.5
Puntos de Verif icación
Comparación de medias por verificación - Nivel II
9,829,18
8,557,82 7,68 7,21 6,91 6,40 6,36
4,03
0,00
1,00
2,00
3,00
4,00
5,00
6,00
7,00
8,00
9,00
10,00
Pun
tuac
ione
s M
edia
s de
Res
ulta
dos
BOE MEH SEG INE TAS MSC MUJ INJ UNE MEP
Portales
Puntuaciones Medias de Resultados - Segmento II - Nivel I
MEH - Ministerio de Economía y Hacienda BOE - Boletín Oficial del EstadoINE - Servicio Público de Empleo Estatal / INEMINJ - Instituto Nacional de la JuventudMEP - Ministerio de Educación, Política Social y DeporteMSC - Ministerio de Sanidad y ConsumoMUJ - Instituto de la MujerSEG - Seguridad SocialTAS - Ministerio de Trabajo y Asuntos SocialesUNE - Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia
A: Nivel AAA: Nivel AANV: No válido
TOTALES
20%
10%70%
Nivel A Nivel AA NV
0,00
1,00
2,00
3,00
4,00
5,00
6,00
7,00
8,00
9,00
10,00
Pun
tuac
ione
s M
edia
s de
Res
ulta
dos
Puntos de Verificación
Comparación de Medias según puntos - Todos los portales - Nivel II
Oleada I 9,48 1,25 1,57 6,57 9,76 9,05 2,80 9,45 7,35 8,36
Oleada II 9,48 3,13 2,65 4,76 9,88 9,51 3,79 9,57 7,67 8,73
Oleada III 8,33 1,25 7,77 4,86 9,53 6,75 6,14 7,66 5,23 8,40
2.1.1 2.1.2 2.1.3 2.1.4 2.1.5 2.2.1 2.2.2 2.2.3 2.2.4 2.2.5
7,14
7,68
7,23
6,566,92
6,596,85
7,30
6,91
0,00
1,00
2,00
3,00
4,00
5,00
6,00
7,00
8,00
9,00
10,00
Oleada I - Enero 2007 7,14 6,56 6,85
Oleada II - Octubre 2007 7,68 6,92 7,30
Oleada III - Mayo 2008 7,23 6,59 6,91
Nivel I Nivel II Media
Comparativa de Puntuación entre oleadasNivel I, Nivel II y Media Global.
8,00
3,00
10,00
1,67
0,00
9,00
0,00
5,00
NP
10,00
0,00
1,00
2,00
3,00
4,00
5,00
6,00
7,00
8,00
9,00
10,00
Pun
tuac
ione
s M
edia
s de
Res
ulta
dos
2.1.1 2.1.2 2.1.3 2.1.4 2.1.5 2.2.1 2.2.2 2.2.3 2.2.4 2.2.5
Puntos de Verificación
Ministerio del Interior (MIR) - Puntuaciones Medias Nivel II
![Page 5: EU Web Accessibility Observatory Madrid “November” 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649da15503460f94a8d0f4/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
5
INTAV: INTECO Accessibility Validator
• Automatic Web Accessibility Checker using WCAG 1.0 and UNE 139803 standards.
• Alerts the webmaster when there are changes in the accessibility level of a website.
• Integrated with the INTECO’s web crawler.
![Page 6: EU Web Accessibility Observatory Madrid “November” 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649da15503460f94a8d0f4/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
6
Web Accessibility Audit Reports
Solutions
Advices
Requirements
Justification
Problems
![Page 7: EU Web Accessibility Observatory Madrid “November” 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649da15503460f94a8d0f4/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
7
LENOX: Proper Language Use Analyzer
• Semantic Web analyzer for the use of sexist language.
• Alerts the webmaster when sexist terms are added to a website (only in Spanish).
• Integrated with the INTECO’s web crawler.
![Page 8: EU Web Accessibility Observatory Madrid “November” 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649da15503460f94a8d0f4/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
8
EUROPEAN UNION WEB ACCESSIBILITY
OBSERVATORY
![Page 9: EU Web Accessibility Observatory Madrid “November” 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649da15503460f94a8d0f4/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
9
Background: European Union
Completed :
• WAB Cluster
• EIAO: Large scale accessibility benchmarking service
• BenToWeb: EARL, WCAG 2.0 Test suites
• Support-EAM: a European accreditation system
• CEN Workshop Agreement
Continuing:
• Euracert Quality Label
• e-Accessibility thematic network (scope is more than web –awarded? )
• eGovernment Monitor Network (eGovMoNet) (scope is more than web accessibility)
![Page 10: EU Web Accessibility Observatory Madrid “November” 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649da15503460f94a8d0f4/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
10
Ideas for the Project
Scope:
1. Provide ongoing Automated Web Accessibility Conformance testing
2. Continuous Improvement of : Methods, Metrics, Tests, Tools
3. Verify “quality” of tools and results(are results reliable?)?
4. Provide access to verified? tools to: Partners, Public?
5. Serve as a meeting place for (or pointer to?) news, information and discussion.
![Page 11: EU Web Accessibility Observatory Madrid “November” 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649da15503460f94a8d0f4/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
11
Summary:
Using the best tools available at the time, provide actionable data on the state of "web accessibility" in the EU in a timely and ongoing manner so that decision makers are properly informed.
![Page 12: EU Web Accessibility Observatory Madrid “November” 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649da15503460f94a8d0f4/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
Strategy
Use a “loosely coupled” tool chain of Crawler(s?), Validator(s), Report Generator(s), Archiver.
• Use the Best of breed
• Allow for updating, testing, comparison, migration.
• Plan for migration to the future.
• Provide “hooks” for 3rd party tools and assistance for manual testing
![Page 13: EU Web Accessibility Observatory Madrid “November” 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649da15503460f94a8d0f4/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
13
Rational:
A “loosely coupled” tool chain allows for:
• INCLUSION of those that meet requirements
• More adaptability
• Easier updating, testing, research, migration.
• Facilitates the Integration of other needs such as Spanish “sexist language”.
• Opens opportunities for cooperation and sharing
![Page 14: EU Web Accessibility Observatory Madrid “November” 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649da15503460f94a8d0f4/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
14
Opportunities
Archive
• Pages (selection/all)
• Results by Tool/page
Research
• Portal tool Fingerprinting
• DOM Fingerprinting
![Page 15: EU Web Accessibility Observatory Madrid “November” 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649da15503460f94a8d0f4/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
15
Some Accessibility Validators: how “valid”?
http://www.totalvalidator.com/
http://www.tawdis.net/
http://wave.webaim.org/
http://accessibility.egovmon.no/en/
http://achecker.ca/checker/index.php
http://valet.webthing.com/access/url.html
http://rastreador.inteco.es/intav/intavHomeAction.do
http://validator.nu/
http://www.sidar.org/hera/
![Page 16: EU Web Accessibility Observatory Madrid “November” 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649da15503460f94a8d0f4/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
16
Crawlers
Harvestman crawler:
http://code.google.com/p/harvestman-crawler/
Heritrix [Internet Archive] :
http://crawler.archive.org/
Nutch based [e.g. INTECO]:
http://lucene.apache.org/nutch/
Bixo [Apache Hadoop cluster, Cascading ] :
http://bixo.101tec.com/about/
Bixolabs [Bixo in Amazon’s Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2) ]:
http://bixolabs.com/
D-Harvestman [dead?]
http://sourceforge.net/projects/dcrawler/
![Page 17: EU Web Accessibility Observatory Madrid “November” 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649da15503460f94a8d0f4/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
17
Challenges
Moving “Web Accessibility” requirements
• Experience highlights current shortcomings (HTML5)
Conformance testing follows laws and standards
Additional Local Requirements (e.g. Sexist Language)
• Harmonisation “plus”
Continuous conformance Testing
Continuous TOOL Testing.
![Page 18: EU Web Accessibility Observatory Madrid “November” 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062314/56649da15503460f94a8d0f4/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
18
Bibliography
A comparative test of web accessibility evaluation methods
http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1414494