Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells [email protected] University of Washington Seattle,...

29
Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells [email protected] University of Washington Seattle, Washington

Transcript of Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells [email protected] University of Washington Seattle,...

Page 1: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.

Web Accessibility 3.0

Rick [email protected] of Washington

Seattle, Washington

Page 2: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.

Goal

We are in the business of helping people climb mountains, figuratively speaking. Our work should not put obstacles in their way.

Page 3: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.

What Are We Doing?

• Serving our clients– All of the population of potential clients

• Supporting institutional goals and purposes– Serving all students well, including the

handicapped

• Delivering essential services through the Web– Continually improving service through

effective use of available technologies

Page 4: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.

Web Services

• Modern higher education relies on the Web to do its business

• We have a diverse audience, including people with handicaps

• Our audience is using a growing variety of means to access our services (PDAs, mobiles, laptops)

Page 5: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.

Device Independence"A philosophical rule [that guided the

development of HTML] was that HTML should convey the structure of a hypertext document, but not details of presentation. This was the only way to get it to display reasonably on any of a very wide variety of different screens and sizes of paper."

Weaving the Web - The original design and ultimate destiny of the World Wide Web by its inventor, Tim Berners-Lee

Page 6: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.

Accessibility

• Web technologies are designed to support device independence

• Accessible design is a special case of the the general goal of maintaining device independence

• Device independent approaches are essential to supporting the growing range of devices connecting to Web information and services

Page 7: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.

Making Progress

Down through the Web ages, we have made progress in sustaining and expanding device independence

• Slop Code Age• Tables Age• X-C/P AgeWill we be able to sustain progress as

we begin building Web applications?

Page 8: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.

Slop Code Age

• No DOCTYPE statement

• End tags optional

• No validation

• Non-standard elements

• Heavy use of attributes for color, font, alignment, etc.

• Heavy use of tables (and tables within tables) for layout

Page 9: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.

Tables Age

• May have DOCTYPE statement

• End tags required, except for empty elements

• Heavy use of attributes for color, font, alignment, etc.

• Heavy use of tables (and tables within tables) for layout

• Some validation against standards

Page 10: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.

Typical Tables Layout

Page 11: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.

Problems With Table Age

• Major code bloat

• Tables imposed sequence on content

• Changing presentation required extensive code modification

• Different presentations for different devices impossible

Page 12: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.

X-C/P Age

• DOCTYPE statement always present, preferably XHTML Strict

• Content is in XHTML– Logical markup using element types

according to their semantic role– Headings, paragraphs, lists and list items,

etc.

• Presentation, including layout, controlled with CSS

• All code validated against standards

Page 13: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.

X-C/P

• XML foundation• Separation of content and presentation• Utilization of semantic logical elements

enables efficient presentation control with CSS

• Alternative attributes supporting non-visual adaptive technologies– Alternative texts for non-text elements– Labels bind title to form controls

Page 14: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.

X-C/P Accessibility

• Can be keyboard accessible

• Alternative stylesheets possible for different devices

• Logical structure of elements to help in semantic interpretation and navigation

• Coherent sequence of content

• Page-by-page display

Page 15: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.

Web 2.0

• Strong interest in improving functionality and usability of Web interfaces

• Standardization of XHTML, scripting, and XML makes possible reliable dynamic modification of page content between page loads with most graphical browsers– AJAX, ATLAS, Dojo, Bindows – FLEX, Flash - add rich media content

Page 16: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.

AJAX

From: Ajax: A New Approach to Web Applications

Page 17: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.

AJAX Enhancements

Page 18: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.

Accessible Web 2.0?• Most current adaptive technology for the

Web is page oriented• Web AT often “scrapes” a copy of the

page on load and is not aware of subsequent changes made in page content– Does not directly monitor the DOM

• How can a voice browser signal changes on a page and direct user to what has changed?

• Houston, we have a problem!

Page 19: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.

Accessible UIs Exist• User Interfaces that work with AT

– Gnome Accessibility Toolkit, Microsoft Activite Accessibility, Java Accessibility API

• Features– Standardized roles for interface divisions– Standardized properties for elements– Focus management– Interaction model– Device navigation mappings– Semantics interpretation– Change notification

Page 20: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.

Progressive Enhancement

• Build a foundation of standards based, semantic, validated, accessible content and function

• Enhance with rich media– Do it in a way that users can fall back

to the accessible foundation if the rich media does not work for the AT

Page 21: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.

What is a Web App?

• If important content is being manipulated between page loads, you have a Web application– Graphics– Content

• Evaluate by 1194.21 and WCAG2

Page 22: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.

AT Problems

• Adaptive Technology is not ready– Still page-by-page oriented– Often not standards based

• AT is often developed by small companies for small markets– Do not have deep pockets or large developer

communities to share the load

• AT is often expensive– Once acquired, users are often slow to

upgrade it

Page 23: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.

Implications for Higher Ed• Move carefully on rich media

– Explore progressive enhancement– Learn about Web applications

• Are Web applications really needed, relative to our goals and values?

• Can progressive enhancement methods meet our needs?

• How can we move forward in improving usability and functionality of our apps in a field still being defined?

Page 24: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.

Accessible Web Apps

Needed: A working contract between the Web page and AT– Notifying AT of changes and their

location– Managing focus in a way that can be

followed by AT– Standard roles for document parts

Work is underway in the W3C Dynamic HTML Working Group on these needs

Page 25: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.

Things Can Fly Apart

As Web apps are created, accessibility could be diminished for other reasons

• Losing semantics

• Narrow technical perspective (silo thinking)

• Toolkit bias

• Vague direction from management

Page 26: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.

Losing Semantics<div class="question">

<div class="question_content"><label for="element_3">

<strong>How do you expect to apply the knowledge and insights gained from this training?</strong></label></div><div class="p_question_input"><textarea id="element_3" name="element_3" cols="80" rows="5"></textarea></div>

</div>Some developers simply create divs with presentation

properties, avoiding semantic elements. With only class or id names, how can AT know the semantic role of a div?

Page 27: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.

Accessible Web 3.0

• Full utilization of XHTML/CSS for Web page design

• Semantic ontologies

• Standard role naming

• Disciplined use of scripting methods

• Mature interoperative contracts between Web applications and clients

Page 28: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.

Other Thoughts

• We need a Gecko-like project to create a standard Open Source adaptive technology engine

• We need a better understanding of non-graphical ways of interacting with processes in an application– Is page model appropriate? What

about a process semantic ontology?

Page 29: Web Accessibility 3.0 Rick Ells rells@cac.washington.edu University of Washington Seattle, Washington.