In a news story last month, the BBC reported that most web sites are "failing to provide the most basic accessibility standards for people with disabilities" with 97% failing to meet minimal accessibility requirements.
This report highlights the ever-increasing tension between building commercially successful sites and sites using the latest sexy technology and accessibility requirements. Given the surgent rise in "Web 2.0" sites, this tension and disparity can only increase.
The report quoted various figures highlighting the percentage of sites that failed in particular areas:
93% failed to provide adequate text descriptions for graphics
As discussed in a previous post, I think there is conflict here between what accessibility requirements demand and what is really and genuinely useful for users with accessibility needs . . . coupled with basic misunderstandings and confusion over how graphics should really be described, whether through the use of Alt attributes or other means.
73% relied on JavaScript for important functionality
Now, there really is no excuse here. Yes, by all means, use Javascript to provide a better user experience for those that can use it, but if your site cannot function without Javascript, you need to find a better solution.
78% used colours with poor contrast, causing issues for those with colour blindness
My main issue with this is, how many people are aware of what the various forms of color blindness demand in terms of color contrasts, etc. and whether it's even possible to allow for all of those needs while presenting a site that is visually pleasing for users with no such issues.
Having said that, there are several resources on the Web that give you the ability to simulate various forms of color blindness, such as the Accessibility Color Wheel and the Etre Colour Blindness Check.
In addition, one simple design principle will also help in this respect. Never use color alone to indicate something specific on your web pages. For example, if you have required fields on a form, don't just highlight them using a red background or red text, but use some other visual indicator that they are required, such as an asterisk or other mark.
98% did not follow industry web standards for the programming code
In my opinion, there was a time when it was virtually impossible to follow industry standards while having a web site that worked correctly in all major browsers. However, today it is certainly possible to adhere to W3C standards. Furthermore, the W3C code validator and CSS validator mean that you have no excuses!
97% did not allow people to alter or resize pages
I'm not sure exactly what this is referring to, but I assume the main issue here is preventing users from resizing the text. The key here is to ensure that you use relative rather than absolute font sizes and preventing users from changing font sizes is a big "No No" so make sure you're not doing it!
89% offered poor page navigation
Again, this point is a bit vague and I can't help wondering who determines what is "poor" and what criteria they used. Many web sites rely on Javascript functionality for page navigation, which, as discussed above, is definitely a problem.
When it comes to page navigation, the main things to remember are consistency and simplicity. It's also a very useful idea to have a good site map and to ensure that each page on your site is navigable to in just a few clicks.
87% used pop-ups causing problems for those using screen magnification software
Pop-ups are the bane of accessibility and usability advocates and should never be used without an extremely good reason. I think this issue is going to appear in a new form with Web 2.0 sites using AJAX functionality.
In conclusion, I think this stats are maybe a bit harsh and overstating the issues and there is always going to be some tension between accessibility advocates and those who want sites that appeal to bleeding edge users but there are still some basic principles that can, at least, minimize accessibility concerns that should be adhered to. Another issue to bear in mind is that, there may also be legal requirements that you need to meet and failure to do so could, in theory anyway, result in legal action against you.
Technorati Tags: accessibility
Friday, 5 January 2007
BBC Reports Most Web Sites Don't Meet Accessibility Requirements
Posted by Ian at 11:30
Labels: accessibility, news
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
CSS and HTML both uses for website designing but whats the main difference between both of them.
online sweepstakes
church software
blackjack software
Great work! I am hoping the same best work from you in the future as well. In fact your creative writing abilities have inspired me to start my own Blog now.
Web Development
hi,
I read your Article. This is an informative post. Please continue post cause it will helpful for others. thanks for your post.
website designing company
The information which BBC pointed is absolutely true. If we work on all these loopholes then we can really come up with some of the most amazing websites ever seen and experienced.
Web Design Company India
Creative writing like content and articles might help to improve and get the high ranking of the website-New York Web Mmarketing-
Post a Comment