Affiliations: [a] B.M.S College of Engineering, Bangalore, India | [b] Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, India
Correspondence:
[*]
Corresponding author: Pradipta Biswas, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, India. E-mail: [email protected].
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Web accessibility is one of the most important aspects of building a website. It is important for web developers to ensure that their website is accessible according to WCAG standards for people with different range of abilities. There is plethora of tools for ensuring conformance to WCAG standards but not many studies compared performance of automatic WCAG tools. OBJECTIVE: This paper compares a set of ten WCAG tools and their results in terms of ease of comprehension and interpretation by web developers. We proposed a Common User Profile format to help personalize contents of website making it accessible to people with different range of abilities. METHODS: We selected ten WCAG tools from World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) to evaluate landing pages of two popular websites. For each webpage, we identified accessibility issues and recommended alternate suggestions to help developers improve accessibility. Further, we highlighted accessibility issues that cannot be captured only through conformance to WCAG tools; and proposed additional methods to evaluate accessibility through an Inclusive User Model. We then demonstrated how simulation of user interaction can capture usability and accessibility issues that are not detected through only syntactic analysis of websites’ content. Finally, we proposed a Common User Profile format that can be used to compare and contrast accessibility systems and services, and to simulate and personalize interaction for users with different range of abilities. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: After careful evaluation of two websites using the ten tools, we noted that, both websites lacked color contrast between background and foreground; lack of sign language alternatives; opening of pop-ups without proper warnings and so on. Further, results from comparative analysis of selected web accessibility tools noted that, there is no single tool that can be found ideal in all aspects. However, from our study, Utilitia Validator by Utilitia SP. z O.O was considered the most feasible tool. By rectifying and incorporating issues and alternate suggestions by simulation study and Common User Profile format respectively, developers can improve both websites making it accessible to maximum audience.
Keywords: WCAG guidelines, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), accessibility evaluation tools, Cambridge Simulator, Inclusive User Model, common user profile
