skip to main content
10.1145/1368044.1368048acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pagesw4aConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

The impact of accessibility assessment in macro scale universal usability studies of the web

Authors Info & Claims
Published:21 April 2008Publication History

ABSTRACT

This paper presents a modelling framework, Web Interaction Environments, to express the synergies and differences of audiences, in order to study universal usability of the Web. Based on this framework, we have expressed the implicit model of WCAG and developed an experimental study to assess the Web accessibility quality of Wikipedia at a macro scale. This has resulted on finding out that template mechanisms such as those provided by Wikipedia lower the burden of producing accessible contents, but provide no guarantee that hyperlinking to external websites maintain accessibility quality. We discuss the black-boxed nature of guidelines such as WCAG and how formalising audiences helps leveraging universal usability studies of the Web at macro scales.

References

  1. R. Baecker, K. Booth, S. Jovicic, J. McGrenere, and G. Moore. Reducing the gap between what users know and what they need to know. In CUU '00: Proceedings on the 2000 conference on Universal Usability, pages 17--23, New York, NY, USA, 2000. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. T. Berners-Lee, W. Hall, J. A. Hendler, K. O'Hara, N. Shadbolt, and D. J. Weitzner. A Framework for Web Science. Found. Trends Web Sci., 1(1):1--130, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. R. A. Botafogo, E. Rivlin, and B. Shneiderman. Structural analysis of hypertexts: identifying hierarchies and useful metrics. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst., 10(2):142--180, 1992. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. B. Caldwell, W. Chisholm, J. Slatin, and G. Vanderheiden. Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0. W3C Working Draft, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), May 2007. http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. S. Ceri, F. Daniel, M. Matera, and F. M. Facca. Model-driven development of context-aware Web applications. ACM Trans. Inter. Tech., 7(1):2, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. E. F. Codd. A relational model of data for large shared data banks. Commun. ACM, 13(6):377--387, 1970. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. D. Dhyani, W. K. Ng, and S. S. Bhowmick. A survey of web metrics. ACM Comput. Surv., 34(4):469--503, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. J. Fink, A. Kobsa, and A. Nill. Towards a user-adapted information environment on the Web. In Multimedia and Standardization 98, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. F. Garzotto, L. Mainetti, and P. Paolini. Hypermedia design, analysis, and evaluation issues. Commun. ACM, 38(8):74--86, 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. S. Gauch, M. Speretta, A. Chandramouli, and A. Micarelli. User Profiles for Personalized Information Access. pages 54--89. 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. D. Heckmann. Ubiquitous User Modeling. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, Saarland University, November 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. ISO/TS 16071:2003 - Ergonomics of human-system interaction - Guidance on accessibility for human-computer interfaces, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. M. Y. Ivory and M. A. Hearst. The state of the art in automating usability evaluation of user interfaces. ACM Comput. Surv., 33(4):470--516, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. H. R. K. Jahng, J.; Jain. Effective design of electronic commerce environments: a proposed theory of congruence and an illustration. Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part A, IEEE Transactions on, 30(4):456--471, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. G. Kappel, B. Prll, W. Retschitzegger, W. Schwinger, and T. Hofer. Modeling Ubiquitous Web Applications - A Comparison of Approaches. In Int. Conf. on Information Integration and Web-based Applications and Services (iiWAS), Sep 2001.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. M. Kellar, C. Watters, and M. Shepherd. A Goal-based Classification of Web Information Tasks. Proceedings 69th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 43, Sep 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. R. Lopes and L. Carriço. Leveraging Rich Accessible Documents on the Web. In W4A'2007: the 4th International Cross-Disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibility, Banff, Canada, 2007. ACM Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. L. Masinter, D. Wing, A. Mutz, and K. Holtman. Media Features for Display, Print, and Fax. RFC 2534, IEFT, Mar. 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. J. Nielsen. Designing Web Usability: The Practice of Simplicity. New Riders Publishing, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Z. Obrenovic, J. Abascal, and D. Starcevic. Universal accessibility as a multimodal design issue. Commun. ACM, 50(5):83--88, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Z. Obrenovic and D. Starcevic. Modeling Multimodal Human-Computer Interaction. Computer, 37(9):65--72, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Z. Obrenovic, D. Starcevic, and B. Selic. A model-driven approach to content repurposing. IEEE Multimedia, 11(1):62--71, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. J. W. Palmer. Web Site Usability, Design, and Performance Metrics. Info. Sys. Research, 13(2):151--167, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. H. Petrie and O. Kheir. The relationship between accessibility and usability of websites. In CHI '07: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, pages 397--406, New York, NY, USA, 2007. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. J. Preece, H. Sharp, D. Benyon, S. Holland, and T. Carey. Human Computer Interaction. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 1994. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. G. Schreiber and M. Dean. OWL Web Ontology Language Reference. W3C Recommendation, World Wide Web Consortium, February 2004. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. B. Shneiderman. Universal Usability. Commun. ACM, 43(5):84--91, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. B. Shneiderman. Promoting universal usability with multi-layer interface design. In CUU '03: Proceedings of the 2003 conference on Universal usability, pages 1--8, New York, NY, USA, 2003. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. B. Shneiderman. Web Science: A Provocative Invitation to Computer Science. Commun. ACM, 50(6):25--27, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. D. Sloan, P. Gregor, M. Rowan, and P. Booth. Accessible accessibility. In CUU '00: Proceedings on the 2000 conference on Universal Usability, pages 96--101, New York, NY, USA, 2000. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. M. K. Smith, C. Welty, and D. L. McGuinness. OWL Web Ontology Language Guide. W3C Recommendation, World Wide Web Consortium, February 2004. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. O. Troyer, W. Goedefroy, and R. Meersman. UR-WSDM: Adding User Requirements Granularity to Model Web-based Information Systems. In First Workshop on Hypermedia Development, HT'98., 1998.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. E. Velleman, C. Meerveld, C. Strobbe, J. Koch, C. A. Velasco, M. Snaprud, and A. Nietzio. Unified Web Evaluation Methodology (UWEM 1.2), 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. M. Vigo, M. Arrue, G. Brajnik, R. Lomuscio, and J. Abascal. Quantitative metrics for measuring web accessibility. In W4A '07: Proceedings of the 2007 international cross-disciplinary conference on Web accessibility (W4A), pages 99--107, New York, NY, USA, 2007. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. M. Vigo, A. Kobsa, M. Arrue, and J. Abascal. User-tailored web accessibility evaluations. In HT '07: Proceedings of the 18th conference on Hypertext and hypermedia, pages 95--104. ACM, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. W3C Device Independence Group. Composite Capability/Preference Profiles (CC/PP): Structure and Vocabularies 1.0. W3C Recommendation, World Wide Web Consortium, January 2004. http://www.w3.org/TR/CCPP-struct-vocab/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Conferences
    W4A '08: Proceedings of the 2008 international cross-disciplinary conference on Web accessibility (W4A)
    April 2008
    207 pages
    ISBN:9781605581538
    DOI:10.1145/1368044

    Copyright © 2008 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 21 April 2008

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article

    Acceptance Rates

    W4A '08 Paper Acceptance Rate12of29submissions,41%Overall Acceptance Rate171of371submissions,46%

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader