blog.

I've just come back from a very interesting lunchtime lecture entitled: WCAG 2.0 for usability specialists by Michael Cooper (from W3C WAI).  It is the second of two events I've attended this year advertised on the 'Bristol Usability Group' network, and it was extremely informative.  Having attended the RNIB WCAG 2.0 one day course last year, I was interested in polishing up some knowledge on building accessible websites, but also in posing a few questions from the perspective of the buzz term 'User Experience'. The talk was really well organised and informative so thank you to Stuart Church from CX Partners for adding it to the Bristol Usability forum.

In his talk, Michael Cooper went through some of the beginnings of accessibility, as well as confronting a few common perceptions as to notions of what is usable, and what is not. 

For example he illustrated that whilst an image online might seem visible and helpful to the average user, without the magic [alt=""] attribute not visible to the average browser user,  it suddenly becomes unhelpful and positively annoying for the screen-reading user, as the random image url is read out loud in an effort to inform the user of it's presence. Whilst information like this is available at the W3C WCAG 2.0 Guidelines site, even Michael Cooper admits that the guidelines are 'carefully crafted to be precise, rather than to be easily read'.  Slightly ironic bearing in mind that one of the 4 key principles of accessibility is for content to be 'Understandable!'

One area of particular interest for me was the notion of a 'A', 'AA' or 'AAA' site. As with everything now, whilst definable in a court of law, what is black and white on paper is often grey in the light of day. 

As I had an official W3C WAI representative right there in front of me, I asked Michael if it was really possible to have a 'AAA' site, as some of the strictest 'AAA' guidelines seem to contradict each other. His response was interesting, and seemed to sum up the best-practise attitudes that are helpfully gaining some momentum in the web world today.

He said (paraphrased):  Yes, there can be 'AAA' standard websites, 'as long as you chose appropriate content for the specific user group, and don't use a conflicting combination of content'. 

User groups and users are ultimately who we're working for, even though we love our clients.  Whilst a bit simplistic, if we can help a user to use a site, then we are doing our job, and Michael Cooper's position on aiming to broaden the possible types and numbers of those users is a cause worth fighting for...even if that means trawling daily through the 'book-length' documentation that accompanies the WCAG 2.0 guidelines!

We look forward to this years release of PDF and Flash specific additional guidelines.

You can view the Talk notes here.

Last month I was privileged enough to have the opportunity to spend a day with the RNIB (Royal National Institute of Blind People) super-accessibility-squad, or SAS for short, and blown away by how much information can be picked up in just a day.

I was in the "Working through WCAG 2.0" day-long workshop, and I would recommend it to anyone who would like to work out some of the differences between the old and new Website Accessibility Guidelines, and/or learn some up-to-date best practises on attempting to meet these guidelines.

My experience was made even better because I was able to sit next to someone who only coded using screen-reading technology, and was therefore able to gain an insight into a level of accessibility know-how that I could not have gained any other way.

I was interested in the realistic approach taken by the RNIB. Whilst they have every right to scream and shout about the unbelievable amount of inaccessible material out there on and off the web, they instead pointed out the small things that you can quickly change to make a big difference to all of your users. This was the least that a user should expect from a website, allowing us all to progress into more complex issues with a good understanding of the standards expected by the RNIB.

Another interesting idea was that by trying to meet all AAA Priority guidelines in WCAG 2.0 could in fact exclude more users than aiming to meet the AA Priority guidelines and only a few but well chosen guidelines from AAA Priority! Obviously this is determined by the user group, but it was an interesting point that could only be really made by the experts!

Hopefully I've sung their praises enough, so please have a look for yourself as I would recommend this course to small and big companies alike, because this is the way web best-practise is definitely taking us.

Course details: http://www.rnib.org.uk/..../work_through_WCAG_2.0.aspx
Related article: http://www.rnib.org.uk/professionals/..../uk_law.aspx

The W3C have recently brought out a new series of guidelines for web accessibility (WCAG 2.0) that we've been  digesting here in the office.  The most immediate change noticeable is the shift in how accessibility is defined.  There are now four principles that all have to be adhered to for conformance, rather than a series of levels you can choose to comply with or not.  The levels are whether your website is:

1. Perceivable - Information and user interface components must be presentable to users in ways they can perceive.
2. Operable - User interface components and navigation must be operable.  (This means that the interface cannot require interaction that a user cannot perform)
3. Understandable - Information and the operation of user interface must be understandable.
4. Robust - Content must be robust enough that it can be interpreted reliably by a wide variety of user agents, including assistive technologies.

Ref: WCAG Introduction 

Although there are several improvements, the language is still very jargony, and an attempt to simplify some of the terms has actually resulted in making some areas more vague.

Interesting reading..

According to The Central Office of Information, all public sector websites will need to comply with strict web accessibility standards by next December, or risk losing their .gov status.

Minimum standards can be viewed here.

How about...

best-cakes-in.theworld?

restaurant-at.theendoftheuniverse?

my-dad-is-better-than.yours?!

or, more applicably:

focusnewmedia.bristol?

These are just some of the potential urls that may come out of ICANN's latest announcement regarding top level domains.

Caving into stakeholder pressure, ICANN have agreed to open up the virtual real estate of the web by making it possible for people to select their own domain names.

Currently, internet users have a limited choice of 21 domain extensions, such as .com, .org, and .uk.  By this time next year people may be able to apply for whatever they like.

A major factor behind this change was the pressure and influence exerted by non-English users of the web. 

"One of the most exciting prospect before us is that the expanding system is also being planned to support extensions in the languages of the world," said Peter Dengate Thrush, ICANN's Chairman. "This is going to be very important for the future of the Internet in Asia, the Middle East, Eastern Europe and Russia." The present system only supports 37 Roman characters.

Many pundits see this move as an act of appeasement to the Chinese, who have made many moves to implement a separate internet (going further, even than their Great Firewall).  Others see it as an inevitable solution to increasing web usage, much like the periodic extension of local telephone codes.

I'm personally hanging on to get first dibs at my own name extension - hands off all you other amy wilson's!

Last Wednesday I had the opportunity to attend a full days' training on e-safety and child protection in relation to online chat facilities and forums. The session was hosted by Tony Domaille of David Niven Associates and the session was not only interesting and useful but also quite an eye-opener.

Tony worked as a police officer for over 30 years as a Detective Sergeant for the Child Protection Department and the last four years working on the Dangerous Offenders Unit concentrating on sexual exploitation of children through the Internet, so he's more than used to dealing with the issue of paedophilia. I was, on the other hand, very naive and completely unaware of the lengths these people will go to in order to carry out their fantasies and that they are generally very respected and trusted members of our community.

We're working with 3 local authorities on web sites which publicise positive activities for young people and include interactive chat facilities. Bath and North East Somerset council (B&NES) have enlisted the help of Tony to ensure that the moderators of the site are fully trained to recognise any misuse of the site. This includes not only being aware of sexual predators and how to deal with them, but also online bullying, cries for help in relation to issues such as suicide or anorexia, and discrimination against others in terms of things like racism or sexuality.

The actual website has also been enhanced by a number of e-safety features to ensure it's as easy as possible for users to report anything that they're concerned about as well as to deter potential predators. Some of the enhancements are:

• Link to Think U Know, which informs on how to have fun, stay in control and how to report online abuse. 
• Link to the Virtual Global Task Force, which includes information on how to report abuse and provides a template for reporting. The reports reach appropriate authorities via the Child Exploitation On-line Protection Centre (CEOP) who disseminate reports/referrals. 
• Link to directly contact site moderators. 
• Inclusion of House rules for use of the site and forum. 
• Internet Protocol (I.P) address to be captured at the point of registration. 
• The email address provided on registration will be verified before the user is able to use the site.  

The new website - B-Active - is due to go live at the end of April.

Disabled internet users will benefit from new web accessibility standards currently being developed by the British Standards Institute (BSI).  

Following the success of their 2006 accessibility guidelines, BSI have gathered together a technical committee to oversee the development of a full standard.  It will lay British website owners open to legal action, should they fail to make their sites accessible to all.

A degree of consultation with affected user groups and industry will be essential to the process, yet the committee will aim to publish the standards early in 2009. 

This will not only affect old websites that have outdated code but also new sites incorporating modern technologies such as Flash, AJAX and Javascript. All non-accessible functionality must have accessible alternatives. 

Web accessibility is often compromised by functional and aesthetic considerations but we've always found a way of building sites that conform to w3c accessibility standards, even if that has meant more time and effort. Big offenders, like River Island, among others, will have to act quickly to avoid the risk of prosecution next year. 

Sources:  BSI PAS 78:2006, Computer Weekly, NMA