White Paper: promoting Design for All and e-Accessibility in Europe

  • Iosif Klironomos
  • Margherita Antona
  • Ioannis Basdekis
  • Constantine Stephanidis
  • EDeAN Secretariat for 2005
COMMUNICATIONS

Abstract

This White Paper results from the collaboration of Design for All (DfA) and e-Accessibility expert bodies representing the European Union member states [ref: the coordination centres of the national European Design for All e-Accessibility network (EDeAN) in 23 European Union Member States, in this document referred to as NCCs]. The objectives of this White Paper are threefold: (1) to present the current state of affairs of EDeAN, active since 2002 as part of the European Commission’s action line supporting the development of the European Information Society; (2) to outline a roadmap for future initiatives, actively reflecting views of the EDeAN network in specific domains related to DfA, e-Accessibility and e-Inclusion; and (3) to bring forward a set of suggestions and recommendations regarding the activities of the network, aiming to support the creation of a fully inclusive European Information Society. The paper is organised as follows: Section 1 provides a short introduction to DfA and Accessibility in Information Society (IS) and Information Society Technology (IST) developments in Europe. Section 2 provides an overview of policy as well as R&D activities related to DfA and accessibility in IST in Europe. Section 3 briefly describes the role of EDeAN and the new challenges that emerge as a result of the changing European policy environment. Section 4 presents current challenges that emerge in five domains directly related to DfA and accessibility, such as policy and legislation, industry, monitoring and evaluation—benchmarking, standardisation, R&D, and education and training. Finally, Sect. 5 puts forward a number of recommendations with regard to future activities for EDeAN. The contents of this paper reflect results from the open discussion forums supported in the EDeAN website (ref: EDeAN Special Interest Groups, SIGs). The draft paper was written by the EDeAN Secretariat for 2005, FORTH-ICS (Greece), and completed with the support of all NCCs. Support was also provided by the European Commission DG Information Society and Media and by the D4ALLnet project (ref: an EC funded project with the code IST-2001-38833).

References

  1. 1.
    Bühler C, Placencia-Porrero I (2002) eAccessibility Expert Group final report: eEurope—participation for all action line: networking centres of excellence in Design-for-all and developing a EU curriculum in Design-for allGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bühler C, Stephanidis C (2004) European co-operation activities promoting Design for All in Information Society Technologies. In: Proceedings of the 9th international conference on computers helping people with special needs (ICCHP 2004), Paris, France. 7–9 July, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 80–87Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bühler C, Wallbruch R (2005) e-Accessibility in Germany: acts and ordinances, outcome of benchmarking and activitiesGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Burzagli L, Emiliani PL, Graziani P (2005) Ambient intelligence and disability: the technological perspectiveGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    COST 219 bis (2001) Bridging the gap? Access to telecommunications for all peopleGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    COM (2001) 529 final, Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, eEurope 2002: accessibility of public web sites and their content. BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    COM (2002) 62 final, Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: eEurope benchmarking report. BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    COM (2005) 229 final, Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: i2010—a European Information Society for Growth and Employment. BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    COM (2005) 425 final, Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: eAccessibility. BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Council of Europe (2003) Resolution 5165/03 e-Accessibility: improving the access of people with disabilities to the knowledge based society, OJ, 14 January 2003Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Council of Europe (2002) The impact of new technologies on the quality of life of people with disabilitiesGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cullen K, Milicevic I, Wynne R (2003) Benchmarking social inclusion in the Information Society in Europe and the USGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Engelen J, Emiliani PL (2005) eAccessibility legislation and policy: the role of standardisation. In: Proceedings of HCII2005 (Las Vegas). Retrieved January 15, 2006 from: http://www.esat.kuleuven.ac.be/pub/bscw.cgi/d19580/standardisation_JE_PLE_final.doc
  14. 14.
    European Commission, Directorate-General for Employment, Industrial Relations and Social Affairs, Unit EMPL/E/4 (2001) Attitudes of Europeans to disability, Eurobarometer 54.2Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    European Commission (2000) eEurope 2002: an Information Society for All action plan. Available at http://www.europa.eu.int/information_society/eeurope/2002/action_plan/pdf/actionplan_en.pdf
  16. 16.
  17. 17.
    European Commission (2002) Delivering e-Accessibility—improving disabled people’s access to the knowledge based society, SEC(2002) 1039Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Marincu C, McMullin B (2004) A comparative assessment of web accessibility and technical standards conformance in four EU States. First Monday. 9, No. 7, July 2004. Retrieved November 5, 2005, from http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue9_7/marincu/
  19. 19.
    Scano R (2004) “Legge 04/2004 dalla teoria alla realtà”, Edizioni IWA ITALY (ISBN: 88-7633-099-2)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Stephanidis C (ed) (2001) User Interfaces for All—concepts, methods, and tools. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ (ISBN 0-8058-2967-9, 760 pp)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Stephanidis C (ed) Salvendy G, Akoumianakis D, Bevan N, Brewer J, Emiliani PL, Galetsas A, Haataja S, Iakovidis I, Jacko J, Jenkins P, Karshmer A, Korn P, Marcus A, Murphy H, Stary C, Vanderheiden G, Weber G, Ziegler J (1998) Toward an Information Society for All: an international R&D agenda. Int J Hum Comp Interact 10(2):107–134Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Stephanidis C, Emiliani PL (1999) Connecting to the Information Society: a European perspective. Technol Disab J 10(1):21–44 (Available online at http://www.ics.forth.gr/hci/html/files/TDJ_paper.PDF)
  23. 23.
    U.S. Code (1998) The rehabilitation act amendments (Section 508). Retrieved January 7, 2005, from http://www.access-board.gov/sec508/guide/act.htm
  24. 24.
    World Health Organization (2003) Future trends and challenges in rehabilitation. Retrieved December 13, 2004, from http://www.who.int/ncd/disability/trends.htm
  25. 25.
    World Wide Web Consortium—Web Accessibility Initiative (W3C-WAI) (1999) Web content accessibility guidelines 1.0. Retrieved January 31, 2005, from http://www.w3c.org/TR/WCAG10/

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Iosif Klironomos
    • 1
  • Margherita Antona
    • 1
  • Ioannis Basdekis
    • 1
  • Constantine Stephanidis
    • 1
  • EDeAN Secretariat for 2005
  1. 1.Institute of Computer ScienceFoundation for Research and Technology – Hellas (FORTH)Heraklion, CreteGreece

Personalised recommendations