Re: Usability, UCD, UX, or '"Usable Accessibility'" TF and Extension

I also think this is a good idea. Thanks Laura 

Debra Ruh, Ruh Global Communications & AXSChat 
Global Accessibility and Disability Inclusion Strategist 
G3ict Employability & Technology Chair
(804) 986-4500 
Debra@RuhGlobal.com
www.RuhGlobal.com

Follow Me on twitter,linked-in, facebook,pinterest, tumblr, Google+
And SKYPE at debraruh 

Proud to announce my book “Find Your Voice using Social Media” http://ow.ly/kxglR

My 2nd book "Uncovering Hidden Human Capital: How Leading Corporations Leverage Multiple Abilities in Their Workforce" will be published in 2015.








> On Jul 4, 2015, at 11:39 AM, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hello Everyone,
> 
> Background:
> 
> Over the years a number [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6] [7], [8], [9] of
> studies and articles have criticized WCAG for having an ambiguous
> relationship with usability, not having a framework that includes
> usability, or not having guidelines on usability best practices etc. I
> reviewed two of the studies [10] [11] for the WCAG Issues Sorted Page
> [12] and there does seem to be a usability theme.
> 
> For instance the study, "Forcing Standardization or Accommodating
> Diversity? A Framework for Applying the WCAG in the Real World" [3],
> cites the WCAG 1.0 definition of accessible [13]:
> 
> "Content is accessible when it may be used by someone with a disability."
> 
> The study then argues that the test for whether a Web site is
> accessible is if people with disabilities can use it, not whether it
> conforms to guidelines. The study concludes that WAI should include
> usability within its remit and future versions of WCAG should include
> guidelines on best practices for usability.
> 
> WCAG 2.0 does not define accessibility [14]. Regarding usability,
> Understanding WCAG 2.0 specifically states [15]:
> 
> "There are many general usability guidelines that make content more
> usable by all people, including those with disabilities. However, in
> WCAG 2.0, we only include those guidelines that address problems
> particular to people with disabilities. This includes issues that
> block access or interfere with access to the Web more severely for
> people with disabilities."
> 
> WAI's Education and Outreach Working Group has explored the
> relationship between accessibility and usability in a number of drafts
> and documents to encourage increased communication and coordination
> between the two areas as well as promoting the benefits of involving
> users with disabilities to identify usability issues that are not
> discovered by conformance evaluation alone. Some of those documents
> are:
> 
> * [Draft] Web Accessibility and Usability  [16]
> * [Editors Draft] Web Accessibility and Usability Working Together [17]
> * Involving Users in Web Projects for Better, Easier Accessibility [18]
> * Involving Users in Evaluating Web Accessibility [19]
> 
> As discussed in my review of Guidelines are only half of the story:
> accessibility problems encountered by blind users on the web [1] the
> definition of "accessible" has recently been expanded to include
> usability in United States Department of Education, Office for Civil
> Rights (OCR) resolution agreements.
> 
> The OCR and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) share enforcement
> responsibility for academic and public accommodations under the
> Americans with Disabilities Act and its 2008 Amendments and Section
> 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. These agencies have the authority to
> conduct a compliance audit or to initiate an investigation in response
> to a complaint, which can be filed by anyone. These agencies will
> often seek to enter into a resolution agreement with the subject
> institution in lieu of conducting an investigation and seeking
> sanctions or bringing a lawsuit. The OCR has begun to use the
> following definition and I quote:
> 
> "'Accessible' means a person with a disability is afforded the
> opportunity to acquire the same information, engage in the same
> interactions, and enjoy the same services as a person without a
> disability in an equally effective and equally integrated manner, with
> substantially equivalent ease of use. The person with a disability
> must be able to obtain the information as fully, equally and
> independently as a person without a disability. Although this might
> not result in identical ease of use compared to that of persons
> without disabilities, it still must ensure equal opportunity to the
> educational benefits and opportunities afforded by the technology and
> equal treatment in the use of such technology. " (Sources: South
> Carolina Technical College System Resolution Agreement [20] University
> of Cincinnati Resolution Agreement [21], Youngstown State University
> Resolution Agreement [22]).
> 
> It is significant to recognize that usability is an important aspect
> for people with disabilities. The topic of "Usable Accessibility" may
> help enhance WCAG 2. The W3C Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
> explains [23] and I quote:
> 
> "Usable accessibility combines usability and accessibility to develop
> positive user experiences for people with disabilities. User-centered
> design processes (UCD) include both techniques for including users
> throughout design and evaluation, and using guidelines for design and
> evaluation. UCD helps make informed decisions about accessible design.
> Thus UCD is necessary to improve accessibility in websites and web
> tools...The goal of web accessibility is to make the Web work well for
> people, specifically people with disabilities. While technical
> standards are an essential tool for meeting that goal, marking off a
> checklist is not the end goal. People with disabilities effectively
> interacting with and contributing to the Web is the end goal. To make
> the Web work well for people with disabilities, designers and
> developers need to understand the basics of how people with
> disabilities use the Web. Following UCD to involve people with
> disabilities throughout design processes and involve users in web
> accessibility evaluation helps design solutions that are effective for
> users and for developers."
> 
> Discussion:
> 
> WCAG's relationship to usability may merit Working Group discussion if
> it has not already been discussed. We may want to contemplate the
> question of if a tighter integration of usability and accessibility is
> in or out of scope for a WCAG Task Force. If it is in scope, would a
> "Usable Accessibility" or UCD extension or other documentation be in
> order?
> 
> Perhaps some usability folks may be interested in an extension, maybe
> the authors the studies? [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6 [7], [8], [9]. At
> this point, I've asked two, who have said they would be happy to work
> on usability documentation and to contribute discussion time
> permitting.
> 
> So...what do you think? Your thoughts and comments on this topic would
> be most welcome and appreciated.
> 
> Kindest Regards,
> Laura
> 
> References:
> 
> [1] Guidelines are only half of the story: accessibility problems
> encountered by blind users on the web - Christopher Power, Andre
> Freire, Helen Petrie, David Swallow
> http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2207736
> 
> [2] Contextual web accessibility - maximizing the benefit of
> accessibility guidelines - Brian Kelly, David Sloan, Lawrie Phipps,
> Helen Petrie, Fraser Hamilton
> http://ukwebfocus.com/papers/forcing-standardization-or-accommodating-diversity-a-framework-for-applying-the-wcag-in-the-real-world/
> 
> [3] Forcing Standardization or Accommodating Diversity? A Framework
> for Applying the WCAG in the Real World - David Sloan, Andy Heath,
> Fraser Hamilton, Brian Kelly, Helen Petri, Lawrie Phipps
> http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1133242
> 
> [4] A challenge to web accessibility metrics and guidelines: putting
> people and processes first - Martyn Cooper, David Sloan, Brian Kelly,
> Sarah Lewthwaite
> http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=2207016.2207028
> 
> [5] Complementing standards by demonstrating commitment and progress -
> Sarah Horton, David Sloan, Henny Swan
> http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2745555.2746654
> 
> [6] The future of WCAG – maximising its strengths not its weaknesses -
> Jonathan Hassell, "it's debatable whether many of the missing success
> criteria to address those missing problems are accessibility or
> usability issues."
> http://www.hassellinclusion.com/2013/01/wcag-future/
> 
> [7] Holistic Approaches to E-Learning Accessibility - Lawrie Phipps
> and Brian Kelly
> http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ817923.pdf
> 
> [8] "...absurd distinctions that are sometimes made about the
> usability and accessibility of web content" - Roger Hudson
> http://usability.com.au/2013/01/headings-who-needs-em/
> 
> [9] "...Particular difficulty with issues that blur the boundary
> between usability and accessibility" - Roger Hudson
> http://www.dingoaccess.com/accessibility/measuring-accessibility/
> 
> [10] Laura's review of "Forcing Standardization or Accommodating Diversity?"
> http://www.d.umn.edu/~lcarlson/wcagwg/reviews/standardisation_or_diversity.html
> 
> [11] Laura's review of "Guidelines are only half of the story"
> http://www.d.umn.edu/~lcarlson/wcagwg/reviews/guidelines_only_half_the_story.html
> 
> [12] Post WCAG 2 Issues Sorted
> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Post_WCAG_2_Issues_Sorted
> 
> [13] WCAG 1.0 definition of accessible
> http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/WAI-WEBCONTENT-19990505/#glossary
> 
> [14] WCAG 2.0 Glossary
> http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#glossary
> 
> [15] WCAG 2.0 on Usability
> http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/intro.html#introduction-fourprincs-head
> 
> [16] [Draft] Web Accessibility and Usability
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/access-use/accessibility-n-usability-2010-10Oct-31.html
> 
> [17] [Editors Draft] Web Accessibility and Usability Working Together
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/access-use/accessibility-n-usability.html
> 
> [18] Involving Users in Web Projects for Better, Easier Accessibility
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/users/involving
> 
> [19] Involving Users in Evaluating Web Accessibility
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/eval/users.html
> 
> [20] South Carolina Technical College System Resolution Agreement (PDF)
> https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/investigations/11116002-b.pdf
> 
> [21] University of Cincinnati Resolution Agreement (PDF)
> http://www2.ed.gov/documents/press-releases/university-cincinnati-agreement.pdf
> 
> [22] Youngstown State University Resolution Agreement (PDF)
> http://www2.ed.gov/documents/press-releases/youngstown-state-university-agreement.pdf
> 
> --
> Laura Carlson
>