Evaluating Accessibility-in-Use
-
Upload
markel-vigo -
Category
Design
-
view
2.763 -
download
2
description
Transcript of Evaluating Accessibility-in-Use
Evaluating Accessibility-in-Use
Markel Vigo1 & Simon Harper2 University of Manchester (UK)
1: @markelvigo2: @sharpic
W4A 2013
[email protected]@manchester.ac.uk
http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.701482
Evidence
Guidelines cover around 53% of the problems encountered by users
Power et al. 2012
Guidelines are only half of the story: accessibility problems encountered by blind users on the web CHI 2012, 433-442
W4A 201313 May 2013 2
Problem
The perception of users about accessibility barriers is difficultly measurable and
generalisable
W4A 201313 May 2013 3
Paradox
– Some barriers are not perceived– Some barriers are encountered but overcome– Barrier free pages can cause a great hindrance
W4A 201313 May 2013 4
Accessibility-in-use
“the effects that real accessibility problems have on the quality of interaction as perceived by real
users when interacting with real pages for achieving real goals”
Vigo and Brajnik, 2011
Automatic web accessibility metrics: where we are and where we can go Interacting with Computers 23 (2), 137-155
W4A 201313 May 2013 5
What do we propose: Step 1. Observation & Identification
of Coping Strategies
6
1. Observation
W4A 201313 May 2013
Cognitive markers that indicate problematic situations
What do we propose: Step 2. Development of algorithms to detect strategies
7
1. Observation 2. Algorithms
W4A 201313 May 2013
What do we propose: Step 3. Deployment in the wild
8
1. Observation 2. Algorithms 3. Deployment
W4A 201313 May 2013
Case studyStep 1. Observation and analysis
• 2 independent studies/datasets generated from ethnographic studies and user tests
• 24 screen reader and screen magnifier users
• 17 coping strategies were identified
9 W4A 201313 May 2013
Case studyStep 2. Implement algorithms
– Asking for assistance– Impulsive clicking– Exploration tactics– Narrowing down search– Gaining orientation– Re-doing– Not operating– Giving up
10 W4A 201313 May 2013
11
WebTacticst1(){..}
DB
User Website Manager /Researcher
1.1 Detection algorithms are injected onto web pages.
1.2 Each algorithm keeps track of determined sequences of events and actions.
3. This event is asynchronously sent to a remote location.
2. When the use of a tactic is detected a notification is triggered.
4. Reports from users are viewed by interested parties.
ti(){..}
tn(){..}
id timestamp URL tactic
ccgu1331569030153 1333922552190 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/ t5
ccgu1331569030153 1333922556391 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/ t1
W4A 201313 May 2013
Case studyStep 3. Deployment: WebTactics
Contributions
• A method to observe accessibility-in-use
• Our approach allows to capture the problems that emerge in the wild
• WebTactics
W4A 201313 May 2013 12
Follow up
13
Contact@markelvigo | [email protected]
Presentation DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.701482
Source codehttps://bitbucket.org/mvigo/cope
W4A 201313 May 2013