Microsoft Web Accessibility Handbook

Web Accessibility Challenges

Participants in the Dialogues identified and explained a complex set of challenges that organizations face when trying to promote Web accessibility. Those challenges include:

Benchmarking

There is agreement that Web accessibility measurement and benchmarking are important for different reasons: for goal setting, for measuring progress, and for proving a business case for Web accessibility. However, there seem to be numerous metrics for Web accessibility. What is the preferred measurement? Is it sensible to first agree on what Web accessibility is and then to define a common measurement or just measure it according to what you are currently doing without asking how you arrive at a given number?

After a measurement or benchmarking tool is selected, the challenge is to understand what the analysis means.

How much compliance is enough? If you have one issue on a Web page, you fail an automated test. What is the threshold? Do you need 100% compliance on one set of pages or tasks and 80% on another? Do you need 90% across the board? Where is that threshold and how do you prioritize against it?

Because of the dynamic nature of Web sites, they can be accessible one day and two weeks later, after the content has changed, they are not as accessible as they were. It is important to be able to monitor a Web site and its content to ensure that accessibility is maintained. Organizations need to start accessible and remain accessible. It is pointless to have an accessible Web site on day one only.

In some countries there are regular evaluations of Web accessibility. Often there is little progress and sometimes there is even a decline.

There is no benchmarking system across European member states to make comparisons across countries and/or to enable sharing of best practices.

Policy Challenges

Legislation helps promote Web accessibility but it is not sufficient. There are limits to the effectiveness of public policy. Often there is no budget or financial resources to accompany Web accessibility requirements.

Most countries in Europe have legislation and government guidelines on Web accessibility. While those countries with legislation are doing slightly better, across Europe the rate of Web accessibility is still not that good.

Multiple policy approaches implemented across Europe to legislate e-Inclusion have led to a mixed array of regulations and, in some cases, further complicate attempts to address the issue.

Countries with guidelines are pushing the accessibility agenda forward but without support from government, it will not be effective.

Even with a very strong legal framework there are no ways to control how that legislation is being applied.

Content Challenges

The Web represents millions of sites, many of which are created by end users and content creators who are not trained software developers. Expecting programmatic accessibility fixes to be made by these end users seems unrealistic.

Even if you have a Content Management System (CMS) that allows you to build accessible Web site templates and an accessible framework, if your content creators know nothing about accessibility then you will not have an accessible Web site. The platform and the content creators have to work together.

Even in places where content creators want to do the right thing, it can be so complex that they make mistakes. The result can be implementations that somewhat meet a checklist but they are completely different from each other. All have different accessibility issues and different usability levels.

An organization can have a governance process that requires a project team to comply with standards, but user-generated content presents additional challenges. Many organizations encourage knowledge sharing through blogs and wikis. While this empowers individual business users, how do you require them to generate accessible content? It is impossible to police it.

Awareness Challenges

A major challenge in many organizations, especially initially, is to raise the profile of Web accessibility. The challenge is multi-pronged and includes lack of awareness, lack of understanding and lack of investment of key stakeholders who can effect positive change.

In general, there is a lack of common understanding about accessibility. Without a common understanding how do we measure accessibility across Europe? How do we find the best cases and practices? How do we find a common understanding about strategy?

At an organizational level, not everyone is aware of Web accessibility and related problems. There is no culture of accessibility among public managers or technology officers. They do not have a technical understanding of Web accessibility.

There are a growing number of Web developers who have been trained in usability and accessibility and have a good understanding of how to implement and test for accessibility. However, most people either do not know about accessibility or have misconceptions about how or why to implement it.

There may be a lack of “self-identification” within some organizations. For example, when told that their intranet is not accessible, some Intranet managers say ‘but we do not employ any disabled people’. This is a cyclical issue: If an organization does not have an accessible intranet, people with disabilities cannot enter the front door. An organization is usually not aware that this has serious repercussions with regard to employment and equality.

Organizations looking to implement an accessibility strategy need to be aware of and account for the diverse needs people with disabilities bring to the Web, including the fact that some people have multiple disabilities and require a variety of strategies all at once. People with visual disabilities have a very different set of needs than those with a dexterity disability, who have different needs than someone with dyslexia, and so on. Also, as the online population ages, more individuals will bring combinations of these issues with them to the Web, expanding the need for accessibility considerations in both scope and complexity.

There is a wealth of information available about Web accessibility, including many different sets of guidelines. This wide range of information can create its own challenges. Which guidelines should an organization use? On which expert should an organization rely? There is almost too much information and it can be difficult to make use of it. It sometimes forces organizations to leap from theory with industry guidelines directly into the practice of implementing those guidelines. There is a gap between theory and practice.

Innovation Challenges

With technology and the Web there is a rapid development cycle and a push to be more and more innovative. When something new or interesting comes out, accessibility must be infused from the very beginning so that the result is accessible or there must be an accessible way of representing it.

The number of government agencies providing eGovernment services is growing. Often these are Web 2.0type activities, such as collecting taxes, paying parking tickets, online education, etc. These Web 2.0type applications are highly interactive and highly complex. When you look at WCAG 1.0, written in 1999, you cannot apply it to the kinds of services being delivered today.

When talking about innovation and accessibility there is the misperception that accessibility is playing to the lowest common denominator and about making things boring. The reality is that accessibility is a challenge that, when relished, is an opportunity to create innovative user interfaces.

Stakeholder Challenges

Organizations can be complex. Owners of particular products, services or information often own everything about them, including the online presence. Engaging with these stakeholders is critical but difficult.

Stakeholders often practice ‘Grudging accessibility’ or just going through a checklist because someone has required it. This does not help usability and inclusivity. People need to be focusing on inclusiveness in order to reap the benefits.

Often when stakeholders are told their Web sites or intranets are inaccessible the reaction is consistent; it is like the five stages of grieving, or rather the five stages of accessibility acceptance:

1. 
   Denial: ‘It cannot be important. Where will we get the funding?’
   
2. 
   Anger: often stakeholders are very angry to hear they are inadequate in this area.
   
3. 
   Bargaining: stakeholders work out how to get around accessibility and how to cope with it without really having to start again
   
4. 
   Depression: often happens when stakeholders start looking at WCAG 1.0.
   
5. 
   Finally, after stakeholders work out what needs to be done and have carried out some research, they reach acceptance. This can take years for some stakeholders.
   

It can be difficult to develop a consistent or sustainable approach to Web accessibility across an organization, so when an employee/evangelist with expertise moves on to a new job or a new role, they take their experience and knowledge with them and it dissipates.

Accessibility typically is not a budgeted line item for most organizations. It is, unfortunately, usually a competing interest. Given the way that technology works, it is one of many things that organizations have to weigh in terms of whether it will make the list of things that they are going to do.

When stakeholders are building a new Web site or intranet and there are an extensive number of competing requirements for functions and features, accessible design may be on the list but may be one of many competing interests. When stakeholders do not understand accessibility, it is likely to fall to the bottom of such lists.