Exploring Application of Knowledge Space Theory in Accessibility Testing

  • Neha GuptaEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1082)


Knowledge space theory has so far most predominantly found applications in e-learning and educational assessment systems. The principles of knowledge space theory can however also be used in the assessment of a system, device, or application in terms of accessibility. A precedence order among the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) can be discovered through careful analysis, and expert knowledge can be used to construct a knowledge structure with each knowledge state representing a set of these guidelines. This is useful not only in gaining an understanding of where a system lies on its way toward becoming universally accessible but also helps in determining the next steps for improvement of the analyzed system’s accessibility from the outer fringe of the current knowledge state. This is a more feasible way of judging a system for its accessibility since it shows exactly in terms of which guidelines the assessed system is accessible. The standards for acceptable accessibility criteria specified and met by organizations or industries will thus be in terms of knowledge states instead of a numerical or graded value. This invokes comprehensiveness, clarity, and customization in practice of accessibility testing.


Accessibility Universal design Artificial intelligence Knowledge-based systems Knowledge spaces Computer-aided analysis Probabilistic computing Best practices Knowledge space theory Accessibility testing Inclusive technology Probability distribution Testing Software testing System testing Adaptive systems Probability distribution System improvement Precedence theory 


  1. 1.
    Doignon, J.-P., Falmagne, J.-Cl.: Knowledge Spaces. Springer, Berlin (1999)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Falmagne, et al.: The assessment of knowledge, in theory and in practice. Springer, Berlin (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Falmagne JC., Cosyn E., Doignon JP., Thiéry N.: The assessment of knowledge, in theory and in practice. In: Missaoui, R., Schmidt, J. (eds.) Formal Concept Analysis. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3874. Springer, Berlin (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Albert, D., Lukas, J. (eds.): Knowledge Spaces: Theories, Empirical Research, Applications. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (1999)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    World Wide Web Consortium: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 (2008).
  6. 6.
    Gouli, E., Gogoulou, A., Papanikolaou, K., Grigoriadou, M.: Compass: an adaptive web-based concept map assessment tool. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Concept Mapping, Pamplona, 14–17 September 2004, pp. 295–302 (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    World Wide Web Consortium: How to meet WCAG 2.0.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Easy AllianceBrooklineUSA

Personalised recommendations