Accessibility 101

Michael Owens
User Experience Designer
michael@designforcontext.com
@design4context
Lesley Humphreys
lesleyh4@gmail.com
@leslo
Accessibility 101
Baltimore UX Meetup• May 9, 2017

@design4context Accessibility 101 Baltimore UX Meetup, May 9, 2017
The evolution of accessibility
● 1986 – Section 508 added as an amendment added to the Rehabilitation Act of
1973
● 1990 – The Americans with Disabilities Act, Title III “Public Accommodation”
● 1997 – Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) formed by the World Wide Web
Consortium (W3C)
● 1998 – Section 508 updated with teeth for federally funded projects
● 1999 – Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 1.0

WCAG 2.0 (2008)
● Perceivable
● Operable
● Understandable
● Robust

WCAG 2.0
Perceivable - Information and user interface
components must be presentable to users in ways they
can perceive.
● This means that users must be able to perceive the information being
presented (it can't be invisible to all of their senses)
● There should be text equivalents to all content
● All information should be available via Assistive Technology such as
screen readers
● Video and audio should have captioning and/or transcripts
4

WCAG 2.0
5
Colors

WCAG 2.0
Operable - User interface components and navigation
must be operable.
● This means that users must be able to operate the interface (the
interface cannot require interaction that a user cannot perform)
● Users should be able to navigate the site without a mouse (via
keyboard interaction)
● Eliminate time-outs
● Eliminate re-directs
● Provide site maps
6

WCAG 2.0
Understandable - Information and the operation of user
interface must be understandable.
● The use of glossaries, indexes, etc. to clarify content.
● Consistent presentation and functionality across pages
● Clear input requirements and error messaging
7

WCAG 2.0
Robust - Content must be robust enough that it can be
interpreted reliably by a wide variety of user agents,
including assistive technologies.
● Support for plug-ins, scripts, applets etc. as technologies evolve
● Accessible PDFs and other file types
8

Accessible Rich Internet Applications
(WAI-ARIA 2014)
● Roles to describe the type of widget presented, such as "menu", "treeitem", "slider",
and "progressmeter"
● Roles to describe the structure of the Web page, such as headings, regions, and
tables (grids)
● Properties to describe the state widgets are in, such as "checked" for a check box, or
"haspopup" for a menu.
● Properties for drag-and-drop that describe drag sources and drop targets
● A way to provide keyboard navigation for the Web objects and events, such as those
mentioned above
9

WAI-ARIA
Properties to define live regions of a page that are likely to get updates
(such as stock quotes), as well as an interruption policy for those
updates—for example, critical updates may be presented in an alert
dialog box, and incidental updates occur within the page.
Information on how Assistive Technologies should interact with those
live regions.
10

● live=POLITENESS_SETTING
● atomic=BOOLEAN
● relevant=[LIST_OF_CHANGES]
● controls=[IDLIST]
● labelledby=[IDLIST]
● describedby=[IDLIST]
WAI-ARIA

Live Region Markup – Politeness
● off (default)
● Do not speak this region
● polite
● Speak this region when the user is idle
● assertive
● Speak this region as soon as possible
● rude
● Speak this region RIGHT NOW
WAI-ARIA

Live Region Markup – Atomic
● true
● This whole region must be spoken when any of its nodes are changed;
the individual changes cannot stand on their own
● false (default)
● Speak only the node that changes; there is enough context for the
individual changes to make sense
WAI-ARIA

Live Region Markup – Relevant
● additions (default) - Nodes added to the region are important and
should be spoken
● removals - Nodes removed from the region are important and should
be spoken
● text (default) - Nodes changed in the region are important and should
be spoken
WAI-ARIA

Over the years since 2008, when WCAG 2.0 was introduced:
● Certain technologies have become more important
● Technology features now exist to support some user needs
● Appropriate guidance for users is now better understood
Therefore need for guidelines that build on WCAG 2.0.
WCAG 2.1 (now!)

● 3 new success criteria, formally accepted by the WCAG Working
Group
● and 25 proposed (under review).
● These SCs are being added to 2.0, which is causing some
controversy & confusion.
The three new criteria are about:
● Small- and touch-screen mobile devices
● Users with low vision
● Users with cognitive or learning disabilities
WCAG 2.1 =

Content can be resized to 400% without loss of content or
functionality, and without requiring two-dimensional
scrolling except for parts of the content where fixed
spatial layout is necessary to use or meaning.
?
1.4.11 - Resize Content

Follow the conversation at
https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/77
Resize Content

How to Design for 400%
100% 200%

WebAIM feedback on WCAG 2.1 draft
WebAIM = a non-profit organization based at the Center for Persons with Disabilities at
Utah State University. http://webaim.org/
A primary concern is that this Level A success criterion (1.4.11) requires 400% text sizing
which would invalidate the existing 1.4.4 Level AA success criterion which requires
200% text sizing. This would cause confusion as to why a Level AA SC requires a lower
threshold for sizing than a new Level A SC.
Meeting this SC will require significant effort by many web authors. Few popular sites
tested come close to meeting the 400% sizing threshold.

User Customization – Canadian Museum for Human Rights

Commitment –
Canadian Museum for Human Rights

The visual presentation of graphical objects that are essential for understanding the
content or functionality have a contrast ratio of at least 4.5:1 against the adjacent
color(s), except for the following:
● Thicker
For graphical objects with a minimum width and height of at least 3 CSS pixels, the graphic has a
contrast ratio of at least 3:1.
● Sensory
Non-text content that is primarily intended to create a visual sensory experience has no contrast
requirement;
● Logotypes
Graphics that are part of a logo or brand name have no minimum contrast requirement.
● Essential
A particular presentation of the graphical is essential to the information being conveyed.
1.4.12 - Graphics Contrast

For designers developing icons that need to be
perceived clearly, the following is an example of
several sizes of icon having sufficient contrast at
different sizes.
The thicker lines (3px or more) have 3:1
contrast (#949494 on #FFFFFF), the small lines
(2px or less) need a darker grey (#777777 on
#FFFFFF).
Graphics Contrast Example

2.2.8 Interruptions (minimum)
There is an easily available mechanism to postpone and suppress interruptions and
changes in content unless they are initiated by the user or involve an emergency.
From GitHub Issue description:
The intent of this Success Criterion is that people with impaired attention and memory
can complete a task. When users are interrupted, they may forget what they are doing
and abandon the task. This can happen even when the original task is extremely
important. For example, a user is making a doctor's appointment, but interruptions
cause the user to forget what they were doing and the critical appointment is not
made.

2.2.8 Interruptions (minimum)
It is worth noting that the task force is proposing
semantics to support an integrated solution. This is a
proposal to help people stay focused and productive.
It is based on a matrix for distractions at the operating
system, browser, or cloud level. Currently people can
turn off distractions such as Skype, and Facebook,
across different devices, and then may forget to turn
them back on.
This idea manages all distractions by forming a cross-
application and cross-device distraction matrix that
manages all distractions in one setting. People and
users can be clustered in terms of importance or
groups.

WebAIM feedback on WCAG 2.1 draft
This success criterion is at odds with 2.2.1 and 2.2.6 which
prescribe pop-ups and notifications to inform of time-outs. It also
conflicts with the new SC 3.2.8 (Change of Content) which requires
that users be notified of content changes.
How can authors inform users of a time-out or content change to
meet one success criterion when such notifications are disallowed
by another?

WebAIM feedback on WCAG 2.2.8
Until standard mechanisms are available for client-side control over
such interruptions, the only mechanism for meeting this success
criterion is via a user control, which itself introduces cognitive load
and comes at notable author effort. This would be at odds with
important and critical messaging systems in modern web
applications.
WebAIM would support adoption of this SC, but only at Level AAA.

Voice Over on the Mac
ugh

Resources
WCAG: https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/
Github Issues: https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/
webAIM: http://webaim.org/
A Web for Everyone: http://rosenfeldmedia.com/books/a-web-for-
everyone/
Inclusive Design Patterns:
https://shop.smashingmagazine.com/products/inclusive-design-patterns

Michael Owens
michael@designforcontext.com
@design4context
Lesley Humphreys
lesleyh4@gmail.com
@leslo
© Copyright Design for Content – add copyright statement unless it’s not appropriate
Presentation is on Slideshare – Go to www.designforcontext.com/insights
Accessibility 101
Baltimore UX Meetup• May 9, 2017

Accessibility 101

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Semelhante a Accessibility 101

Semelhante a Accessibility 101 (20)

Mais de Design for Context

Mais de Design for Context (20)

Último

Último (20)

Accessibility 101