Automated Accessibility Evaluation Software for Authenticated Environments

A Heuristic Usability Evaluation
  • Elisa Maria Pivetta
  • Daniela Satomi Saito
  • Carla da Silva Flor
  • Vania Ribas Ulbricht
  • Tarcísio Vanzin
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8516)

Abstract

Web accessibility has been the subject of much discussion regarding the need to make Web content accessible to all people, regardless of their abilities or disabilities. While some testing techniques require human intervention, accessibility can also be evaluated by automated tools. Automated evaluation tools are software programs that examine the code of Web pages to determine if they conform to a set of accessibility guidelines that are often based on the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Version 2.0 (WCAG 2.0), developed by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). In this context, the purpose of this study is to analyze an automated software program for evaluating authenticated environments and verify the usability of this tool, since automated systems require precision and reliability in terms of both results and use in any type of environment. With this in mind, this paper aimed at evaluating the ASES software by means of a heuristic evaluation carried out by three experts. The analysis revealed major accessibility problems, as well as improper functioning of available tools and inconsistency of results. Furthermore, ASES was found to have problems of efficiency, interaction, validity, and reliability in the results presented. Considering that this is an open-source accessibility testing tool that can be found on a government web site, the correction or improvement of the system’s deficiencies identified in this study is highly recommended, as there is a lack of software available to evaluate authenticated environments.

Keywords

Automated evaluation tool heuristic evaluation usability 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    World Wide Web Consortium, http://www.w3.org/
  2. 2.
    Brajnik, G.: Beyond conformance: The role of accessibility evaluation methods. In: Hartmann, S., Zhou, X., Kirchberg, M. (eds.) WISE 2008. LNCS, vol. 5176, pp. 63–80. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brajnik, G.: Web Accessibility Testing: when the method is the culprit. In: Miesenberger, K., Klaus, J., Zagler, W.L., Karshmer, A.I. (eds.) ICCHP 2006. LNCS, vol. 4061, pp. 156–163. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
  5. 5.
  6. 6.
    Pivetta, E.M., Flor, C., Saito, D.S., Ulbricht, V.R.: Analysis of an automatic accessibility evaluator to validate a virtual and authenticated environment. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications 4, 15–22 (2013)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nielsen, J.: Why You Only Need to Test with 5 Users (2000), http://www.nngroup.com/articles/why-you-only-need-to-test-with-5-users/
  8. 8.
    LabUtil: Laboratório de utilizabilidade: critérios ergonômicos, http://www.labiutil.inf.ufsc.br/CriteriosErgonomicos/LabIUtil2003-Crit/100conduc.html
  9. 9.
    Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0, http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20
  10. 10.
    Al-Khalifa, H.S., Al-Kanhal, M., Al-Nafisah, H., Al-soukaih, N., Al-hussain, E., Al-onzi, M.: A Pilot Study for Evaluating Arabic Websites Usign Automated WCAG 2.0 Evaluation Tools. In: Proceedings of the 2011 International Conference on Innovations In Information Technology. IEEE Computer Society, Saudi Arabia (2011)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    UMIC - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento, http://www.acessibilidade.gov.pt/accessmonitor/
  12. 12.
  13. 13.
    e-MAG – Modelo de Acessibilidade de Governo Eletrônico – versão 3.0 (2011), http://www.governoeletronico.gov.br/biblioteca/arquivos/e-mag-3.0/download
  14. 14.
  15. 15.
    Web Accessibility Initiative, http://www.w3.org/WAI/
  16. 16.
    Web Accessibility Assessment Tool, http://www.accessible-eu.org/
  17. 17.
    Web Accessibility Evaluation Tool, http://wave.webaim.org
  18. 18.
  19. 19.
    Barbosa, G.A.R., Santos, N.S.S., Reis, S.S., Prates, R.O.: Relatório da Avaliação de Acessibilidade da Plataforma Lattes do CNPq sob a Perspectiva de Deficientes Visuais. In: Anais Estendidos do IHC 2010, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, pp. 139–150 (2010) Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Paddison, C., Englefield, P.: Applying heuristics to accessibility inspections. Interacting with Computers 16, 507–521 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Preece, J., Rogers, Y., Sharp, H.: Design de Interação - Além da interação homem-computador. Bookman, Porto Alegre (2005)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nielsen, J.: Topic: Heuristic Evaluation (1997), http://www.nngroup.com/topic/heuristic-evaluation/
  23. 23.
    Prates, R.O., Barbosa, S.D.J.: Avaliação de interfaces de usuário: conceitos e métodos. In: XXIII Congresso Nacional da Sociedade Brasileira de Computação, SBC, Rio de Janeiro, pp. 1–43 (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elisa Maria Pivetta
    • 1
  • Daniela Satomi Saito
    • 1
  • Carla da Silva Flor
    • 1
  • Vania Ribas Ulbricht
    • 1
  • Tarcísio Vanzin
    • 1
  1. 1.Post-graduate Program in Knowledge Engineering and ManagementFederal University of Santa CatarinaFlorianópolisBrazil

Personalised recommendations