Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

How Inclusive Is Conceptual Modeling? A Systematic Review of Literature and Tools for Disability-Aware Conceptual Modeling

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Conceptual Modeling (ER 2023)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 14320))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 1142 Accesses

Abstract

The reports on Disability by the World Health Organization show that the number of people with disabilities is increasing. Consequently, accessibility should play an essential role in information systems engineering research. While software and web engineering research acknowledge this need by providing, e.g., web accessibility guidelines and testing frameworks, we show in this paper, based on a systematic review of the literature and current modeling tools, that accessibility is, so far, a blind spot in conceptual modeling research. With the paper at hand, we aim to identify current research gaps and delineate a vision toward more inclusive, i.e., disability-aware conceptual modeling. One key finding relates to a gap in research and tool support concerning physical disabilities. Based on these results, we further present the first modeling tool that can be used keyboard-only, thereby including users with physical disabilities to engage in conceptual modeling.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1ydHlKYoIYqc2QglPIBMSpDHeyS5skuln?usp=sharing.

  2. 2.

    It should be noted that this prototype contribution does not necessarily mean that all people with physical disabilities can work entirely without limitations. Still, it should lower some essential barriers and therefore be more inclusive.

References

  1. Accessibility Developer Guide: How to implement websites that are ready for keyboard only usage (2018). https://www.accessibility-developer-guide.com/knowledge/keyboard-only/how-to-implement/. Accessed 23 May 2023

  2. Albusays, K., et al.: The diversity crisis in software development. IEEE Softw. 38(2), 19–25 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bork, D., Alter, S.: Satisfying four requirements for more flexible modeling methods: theory and test case. Enterp. Model. Inf. Syst. Archit. Int. J. Concept. Model. 15, 3:1–3:25 (2020). https://doi.org/10.18417/emisa.15.3

  4. Bork, D., Roelens, B.: A technique for evaluating and improving the semantic transparency of modeling language notations. Softw. Syst. Model. 20(4), 939–963 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-021-00895-w

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Brophy, P., Craven, J.: Web accessibility. Libr. Trends 55(4), 950–972 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. de Carvalho, J.F., Amaral, V.: Towards a modelling workbench with flexible interaction models for model editors operating through voice and gestures. In: 2021 IEEE 45th Annual Computers, Software, and Applications Conference (COMPSAC), pp. 1026–1031. IEEE (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  7. ConnectedPapers. https://www.connectedpapers.com/. Accessed 15 May 2023

  8. Cross, C., Cetinkaya, D., Dogan, H.: Transforming diagrams’ semantics to text for visually impaired. In: Marcus, A., Rosenzweig, E. (eds.) HCII 2020. LNCS, vol. 12200, pp. 339–350. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49713-2_24

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. David, I., et al.: Blended modeling in commercial and open-source model-driven software engineering tools: a systematic study. Softw. Syst. Model. 22(1), 415–447 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-022-01010-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. De Carlo, G., Langer, P., Bork, D.: Advanced visualization and interaction in GLSP-based web modeling: realizing semantic zoom and off-screen elements. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, MODELS 2022, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 23–28 October 2022, pp. 221–231. ACM (2022)

    Google Scholar 

  11. De Carlo, G., Langer, P., Bork, D.: Rethinking model representation - a taxonomy of advanced information visualization in conceptual modeling. In: Ralyté, J., Chakravarthy, S., Mohania, M., Jeusfeld, M.A., Karlapalem, K. (eds.) ER 2022. LNCS, vol. 13607, pp. 35–51. Springer, Cham (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-17995-2_3

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Eclipse: GLSP. https://www.eclipse.org/glsp/. Accessed 23 May 2023

  13. Gabrysiak, G., Giese, H., Lüders, A., Seibel, A.: How can metamodels be used flexibly. In: Proceedings of ICSE 2011 Workshop on Flexible Modeling Tools, Waikiki/Honolulu, vol. 22 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Guerra, E., de Lara, J.: On the quest for flexible modelling. In: Wasowski, A., Paige, R.F., Haugen, Ø. (eds.) Proceedings of the 21th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, MODELS 2018, Copenhagen, Denmark, 14–19 October 2018, pp. 23–33. ACM (2018). https://doi.org/10.1145/3239372.3239376

  15. Kavcic, A.: Software accessibility: recommendations and guidelines. In: International Conference on “Computer as a Tool”, pp. 1024–1027 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  16. King, A., Blenkhorn, P., Crombie, D., Dijkstra, S., Evans, G., Wood, J.: Presenting UML software engineering diagrams to blind people. In: Miesenberger, K., Klaus, J., Zagler, W.L., Burger, D. (eds.) ICCHP 2004. LNCS, vol. 3118, pp. 522–529. Springer, Heidelberg (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-27817-7_76

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Kitchenham, B., et al.: Systematic literature reviews in software engineering-a tertiary study. Inf. Softw. Technol. 52(8), 792–805 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Loitsch, C., Weber, G.: Viable haptic UML for blind people. In: Miesenberger, K., Karshmer, A., Penaz, P., Zagler, W. (eds.) ICCHP 2012. LNCS, vol. 7383, pp. 509–516. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31534-3_75

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Luque, L., Veriscimo, E.S., Pereira, G.C., Filgueiras, L.V.L.: Can we work together? on the inclusion of blind people in UML model-based tasks. In: Langdon, P.M., Lazar, J., Heylighen, A., Dong, H. (eds.) Inclusive Designing, pp. 223–233. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05095-9_20

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. MDN: Keyboard. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Accessibility/Understanding_WCAG/Keyboard (2023). Accessed 23 May 2023

  21. Metatla, O., Bryan-Kinns, N., Stockman, T.: Constructing relational diagrams in audio: the multiple perspective hierarchical approach. In: Proceedings of the 10th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility, pp. 97–104 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Modeling Languages: Top online UML modeling tools. https://modeling-languages.com/web-based-modeling-tools-uml-er-bpmn/. Accessed 01 May 2023

  23. Monaco, F.: Color blind accessibility manifesto. Commun. ACM 65(8), 7–7 (2022)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Moody, D.L.: The physics of notations: toward a scientific basis for constructing visual notations in software engineering. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 35(6), 756–779 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Muff, F., Fill, H.G.: Initial concepts for augmented and virtual reality-based enterprise modeling. In: ER Demos/Posters, pp. 49–54 (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Nganji, J.T., Nggada, S.H.: Disability-aware software engineering for improved system accessibility and usability. Int. J. Softw. Eng. Appl. 5(3), 47–62 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Ossher, H., van der Hoek, A., Storey, M.D., Grundy, J., Bellamy, R.K.E.: Flexible modeling tools (flexitools2010). In: Kramer, J., Bishop, J., Devanbu, P.T., Uchitel, S. (eds.) Proceedings of the 32nd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering - Volume 2, ICSE 2010, Cape Town, South Africa, 1–8 May 2010, pp. 441–442. ACM (2010). https://doi.org/10.1145/1810295.1810419

  28. Paiva, D.M.B., Freire, A.P., de Mattos Fortes, R.P.: Accessibility and software engineering processes: a systematic literature review. J. Syst. Softw. 171, 110819 (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Petersen, K., Vakkalanka, S., Kuzniarz, L.: Guidelines for conducting systematic mapping studies in software engineering: an update. Inf. Softw. Technol. 64, 1–18 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Sandkuhl, K., et al.: From expert discipline to common practice: a vision and research agenda for extending the reach of enterprise modeling. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 60(1), 69–80 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-017-0516-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Schulz, M., Pieper, M.: Web compliance management: barrier-free websites just by simply pressing the button? Accessibility and the use of content-management-systems. In: Stephanidis, C., Pieper, M. (eds.) UI4ALL 2006. LNCS, vol. 4397, pp. 419–426. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-71025-7_27

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  32. Seifermann, S., Groenda, H.: Towards Collaboration on Accessible UML Models. Mensch und Computer 2015-Workshopband (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Seifermann, S., Groenda, H.: Survey on textual notations for the unified modeling language. In: 2016 4th International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development (MODELSWARD), pp. 28–39. IEEE (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Torres, M.J.R., Barwaldt, R.: Approaches for diagrams accessibility for blind people: a systematic review. In: 2019 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), pp. 1–7. IEEE (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Torres, M.J.R., Barwaldt, R., Pinho, P.C.R., de Topin, L.O.H., Otero, T.F.: An auditory interface to workspace awareness elements accessible for the blind in diagrams’ collaborative modeling. In: 2020 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), pp. 1–7. IEEE (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  36. W3: IPO Announcement (1997). https://www.w3.org/Press/IPO-announce. Accessed 23 May 2023

  37. W3C: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 (2018). https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/. Accessed 18 Sept 2022

  38. WAI: Accessibility Intro (2022). https://www.w3.org/WAI/fundamentals/accessibility-intro/. Accessed 22 May 2023

  39. WebAIM: Diverse Abilities and Barriers (2017). https://www.w3.org/WAI/people-use-web/abilities-barriers/. Accessed 23 Nov 2022

  40. WebAIM: WebAIM’s WCAG 2 Checklist (2021). https://webaim.org/standards/wcag/checklist. Accessed 18 Sept 2022

  41. WebAIM: Keyboard Accessibility (2022). https://webaim.org/techniques/keyboard/. Accessed 23 May 2023

  42. WebAIM: The 2023 report on the accessibility of the top 1,000,000 home pages (2023). https://webaim.org/projects/million/. Accessed 23 May 2023

  43. Weber, G., Weimann, K.: Editing a test suite for accessibility of interactive web sites. In: Stephanidis, C. (ed.) UAHCI 2007. LNCS, vol. 4556, pp. 193–201. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-73283-9_23

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  44. WHO: Disability (2023). https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/disability-and-health. Accessed 22 May 2023

  45. Wildhaber, F., Salloum, N., Gygli, M., Kennel, A.: Self-directed creation and editing of UML class diagrams on mobile devices for visually impaired people. In: Tenth International Model-Driven Requirements Engineering, pp. 49–57. IEEE (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  46. Wüest, D., Seyff, N., Glinz, M.: FlexiSketch: a lightweight sketching and metamodeling approach for end-users. Softw. Syst. Model. 18(2), 1513–1541 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-017-0623-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Zhang, B., Chen, Y.: Enhancing UML conceptual modeling through the use of virtual reality. In: 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (2005)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. TU Wien, Business Informatics Group, Favoritenstrasse 9-11, 1040, Vienna, Austria

    Aylin Sarioğlu, Haydar Metin & Dominik Bork

Authors
  1. Aylin Sarioğlu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Haydar Metin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dominik Bork
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dominik Bork .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Federal University of Espírito Santo, Vitória, Brazil

    João Paulo A. Almeida

  2. Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal

    José Borbinha

  3. University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands

    Giancarlo Guizzardi

  4. University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

    Sebastian Link

  5. Stockholm University, Kista, Sweden

    Jelena Zdravkovic

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Sarioğlu, A., Metin, H., Bork, D. (2023). How Inclusive Is Conceptual Modeling? A Systematic Review of Literature and Tools for Disability-Aware Conceptual Modeling. In: Almeida, J.P.A., Borbinha, J., Guizzardi, G., Link, S., Zdravkovic, J. (eds) Conceptual Modeling. ER 2023. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 14320. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47262-6_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47262-6_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-47261-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-47262-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics