Course:LIBR559A/Oud, J. (2012).

Citation: Oud, J. (2012). How well do Ontario library web sites meet new accessibility requirements? Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, 7(1), 1-17

Objectives: To determine how compliant Ontario public, community college, and university libraries are with the WCAG 2.0 guidelines [priority A and priority AA requirements] and to identify the major compliance errors that will need to be corrected.

Sample: This website evaluation study took place in Ontario. A total of 64 library web sites were analyzed: 20 university, 21 college, and 23 public.

Methodology: The Total Validator (professional version) was used to automatically check web accessibility. “The home page and 29 other pages from each site were randomly selected by Total Validator, for a total of 30 pages per site or 1, 860 pages overall” (p. 4). The pages were checked for markup errors in the page’s html/xhtml and css code and WCAG 2.0 accessibility errors. Library catalogues, vendor databases that cannot be modified locally by the library, and pages requiring a login were excluded from being checked. The WCAG Contrast Checker was used to analyze the colour contrast of each page checked.

Main results: All of the 1,860 pages checked had errors meaning that none of the web sites were compliant with WCAG 2.0 guidelines at priority A or priority AA levels. The average numbers of accessibility errors per page were: 14.75 (all libraries); 15.99 (college libraries); 14.38 (public libraries); and 13.99 (university libraries). The most common errors included invalid page code (html/xhtml, css) (in 99.8% of the total number pages assessed); poor color contrast (90.4% of the total number of pages assessed); incorrect form control labeling (67.9% of the total number of pages assessed); and no ALT attributes for non-text content (53.8% of the total number of pages assessed).

Discussion/Conclusion: The most accessibility errors were found on library home pages. This is concerning because the home page is the first page patrons come across to find library resources and services. The most common accessibility errors found included invalid or incorrect html and css page code making it difficult for assistive technologies to correctly read the web page. Other errors included poor contrast between text and background, incorrect form field labeling, failure to provide submit buttons for search boxes, omitting or providing incorrect ALT text for images, having multiple links with the same text, using headings improperly, formatting pages with html instead of css, using absolute units of measure to specify the size of elements on a page, and not providing descriptive text for tables so people using screen reader software can interpret them properly. This study also found errors that the automated testing could not detect. Detection of these additional errors can require expert or user testing including reviewing web pages with checklists, keyboard navigation, resizing pages, using semi-automated tools like the WCAG Contrast Checker, or using screen reading software like Fangs and Web Anywhere.

Oud (2012) discusses how accessible web design will not only benefit people with disabilities but all people because the basic premises of web accessibility are the same as what other users prefer too. Work still needs to be done on making library web sites compliant to the WCAG 2.0 guidelines in order to meet the legal requirements in Ottawa.

Pitfalls, Blind Spots, and Weaknesses of This Article: The major limitation identified in this study is the limits of automated testing. Automated testing is a good base to start from but an automated testing tool will check for some compliance guidelines and errors but miss others. Therefore, it is important to use multiple methods accessibility assessments such as expert assessment and user-based usability testing, to identify as many accessibility problems as possible.

Theoretical Framework: The context of this study is situated in the Social Construction of Technology (SCOT). The Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities (AODA) was augmented to improve accessibility for people with disabilities in a variety of areas. The Information and Communications section: sets out requirements for providing information in accessible format and will have a significant impact on libraries, including their collections, their method of communicating with patrons, and their web sites. By 2021, all Ontario websites will need to comply with established international standards for web accessibility (p. 1). These new standards are established to ensure independence, dignity and equal opportunity for all including people with disabilities in Ontario.

Potential Contribution to The Scholarship of Social Studies of Library and Information and to The Practice of Librarianship:

This study highlights the importance of web accessibility for people with disabilities so they have the same access to information and support just like any other person. Accessibility will open doors and opportunities for people with disabilities in the different domains of life including the social studies of Library and Information and the practice of Librarianship whether it be as a students, researchers or patrons.

Page Author: Karan Bola